Which Religion is the One True Religion?

Wait, I don't understand abortion. Is it done when the fetus' brain is already developed?

If that's the number of problems with abortion once it's legal, imagine how bad it is when it is illegal with hacks performing abortion.

The fetus is not a human until it has developed nerves and a brain. Before, that it is just a bunch of cells no more sentient than your own skin.

real life wrote:

timberlandko wrote:

Look, real life, your objection to abortion stems from and is driven by your religious beliefs. First, for the purposes of this discussion, which is titled "Which Religion is the One True Religion", no primacy for any religious belief system has been established. It does not follow that a particular religion-based position on anything - abortion, gardening, parking tickets, or flyfishing, has any relevance to this particular discussion. You really should get your act together before you try taking it on the road.

Yeah that's always a good one and Frank has tried it too. When you run out of things to say, you simply come back with something along the lines of 'You don't belong in this discussion,' or "Why are you taking the thread off topic?' as if that was of any relevance when you range far and wide on any and every rabbit trail. What a double standard.

See it however you wish. Its a valid observation. I don't mind the digression - its as entertaining as the main discussion, and your contributions have been chief among the entertainments offered. Nobody's marching along with your 'You don't belong in this discussion,' or "Why are you taking the thread off topic?' straw men - its just you and them in that parade.

Quote:

As you'll recall, not I but Imposter brought the abortion issue into this thread when he tried to use it to imply that Christianity was disqualified for consideration if it was pro-life.

Yoiu do haul around an army of straw men.

Quote:

It's too bad that you've embarrassed yourself so greatly in the discussion of abortion, and I feel bad for you. I really do. But what is done is done.

And you have a remarkable propensity for projection and wiishful thinking.

Quote:

Next time, as I said you ought to fact check first. At least when it occurred some folks had the good sense to show embarrassment for you.

No embarrassment at this end - any you sense is right there with you.

---------------------------------------------

Quote:

So if you are done dodging the issue, are you still willing to defend the practice of the slow, painful and ghastly dismemberment of a child by slicing him in little pieces in the womb (D&C abortions)?

Yet another straw man - I've done no such thing.

Quote:

Or how about the forced inhalment of poisonous liquid to chemically burn the developing lungs of the baby, causing an extremely torturous and excruciatingly painful death (saline abortions)?

And another - keep it up, you're on a roll.

Quote:

Or how about the feet first delivery excepting the head of the infant which is punctured and the brains vacuumed out as the arms and legs wiggle their last just outside the mothers body (partial birth abortions) ?

There ya go - I knew I could count on you for consistency.

Quote:

My point is:

Do you have the courage to speak up against ANY of these? If not, are you really qualified to judge what is and is not a "true religion" ?

Unless there's one under your hat, you have no point, you have an agenda, an agenda which you so far have neither presented nor defended in valid manner. Its easy to understand your insistance upon claiming victory; you have displayed no concept of what the exercize is or how it is to be conducted.

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:

If that's the number of problems with abortion once it's legal, imagine how bad it is when it is illegal with hacks performing abortion.

The fetus is not a human until it has developed nerves and a brain. Before, that it is just a bunch of cells no more sentient than your own skin.

Do you oppose abortion after the brain is present?

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002398.htm

It's interesting to see how gory real life can get to describe an abortion while ignoring all the trauma living children are experiencing around the world. He presumes to know how all abortions are performed that affects the baby without any concern for the host mother. How many embryos were carried to full term and born with disease and other deformaties? Who is to care for them? Has real life lifted a finger to help even one of them? How about all the children in Africa? Many are starving. Many young children are raped and affected with HIV/AIDS. Who is caring for these children? It is general knowledge that in India, girl babies are killed by the millions every year. They are killed after birth. Has real life lifted a finger to save them? Who will care for all of these unwanted children? Real life sees only one side on the question of abortion, but fails to understand that the woman has the right to her body; not real life or anybody else. Nobody has a right to challenge the abortion of another women. If they feel so strongly about saving an embryo, they have plenty of opportunities to save the children already born, Otherwise, it's totally a hypocrisy.

real life wrote:

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:

If that's the number of problems with abortion once it's legal, imagine how bad it is when it is illegal with hacks performing abortion.

The fetus is not a human until it has developed nerves and a brain. Before, that it is just a bunch of cells no more sentient than your own skin.

Do you oppose abortion after the brain is present?

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002398.htm

Yep. Always have.


The fifth day is the best day to abort. You can't harvest anything useful at that time period. You can't even technically reverse what you've done, which you could theoretically do if you aborted at the blastocyst stage. Unfortunately, it's very difficult to abort precisely at that stage.

From that article, you've provided, I see nothing wrong with abortions before week 3. After week 3, you really can't say it's ethical. What with the development of nerves and a brain, it must be aware of being shredded apart.

This is what Frank has been talking about for the past two weeks (I think it's two weeks). I thought that was evident from his talk on "no brainwaves", although now that I've seen his article, I think he was wrong to talk about fetus and not specify a time point.

By the way, what do you think of chimeras?

It's interesting to see how gory real life can get to describe an abortion while ignoring all the trauma living children are experiencing around the world. He presumes to know how all abortions are performed that affects the baby without any concern for the host mother. How many embryos were carried to full term and born with disease and other deformaties? Who is to care for them? Has real life lifted a finger to help even one of them? How about all the children in Africa? Many are starving. Many young children are raped and affected with HIV/AIDS. Who is caring for these children? It is general knowledge that in India, girl babies are killed by the millions every year. They are killed after birth. Has real life lifted a finger to save them? Who will care for all of these unwanted children? Real life sees only one side on the question of abortion, but fails to understand that the woman has the right to her body; not real life or anybody else. Nobody has a right to challenge the abortion of another women. If they feel so strongly about saving an embryo, they have plenty of opportunities to save the children already born, Otherwise, it's totally a hypocrisy.

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:

real life wrote:

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:

If that's the number of problems with abortion once it's legal, imagine how bad it is when it is illegal with hacks performing abortion.

The fetus is not a human until it has developed nerves and a brain. Before, that it is just a bunch of cells no more sentient than your own skin.

Do you oppose abortion after the brain is present?

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002398.htm

Yep. Always have.


The fifth day is the best day to abort. You can't harvest anything useful at that time period. You can't even technically reverse what you've done, which you could theoretically do if you aborted at the blastocyst stage. Unfortunately, it's very difficult to abort precisely at that stage.

From that article, you've provided, I see nothing wrong with abortions before week 3. After week 3, you really can't say it's ethical. What with the development of nerves and a brain, it must be aware of being shredded apart.

This is what Frank has been talking about for the past two weeks (I think it's two weeks). I thought that was evident from his talk on "no brainwaves", although now that I've seen his article, I think he was wrong to talk about fetus and not specify a time point.

By the way, what do you think of chimeras?

I'm glad to hear that you oppose abortion after it is evident that the brain has been formed.

Regarding any type of birth defect or malformation of chromosonal or other structures, it certainly is unfortunate. However, killing a victim of a birth defect or one who is born with a disease or other condition is never the right solution.

Ofcoarse they are! It's all about a potential baby and babies already born.

As to real life's question, it's up to you to prove me wrong; not the other way around. It's almost impossible to prove a negative. Show us the evidence that I'm wrong, and I will apologize.

Until then, I will stand by my statements.

Ofcoarse they are! It's all about a potential baby and babies already born.

As to real life's question, it's up to you to prove me wrong; not the other way around. It's almost impossible to prove a negative. Show us the evidence that I'm wrong, and I will apologize.

Until then, I will stand by my statements.

real life wrote:

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:

real life wrote:

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:

If that's the number of problems with abortion once it's legal, imagine how bad it is when it is illegal with hacks performing abortion.

The fetus is not a human until it has developed nerves and a brain. Before, that it is just a bunch of cells no more sentient than your own skin.

Do you oppose abortion after the brain is present?

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002398.htm

Yep. Always have.


The fifth day is the best day to abort. You can't harvest anything useful at that time period. You can't even technically reverse what you've done, which you could theoretically do if you aborted at the blastocyst stage. Unfortunately, it's very difficult to abort precisely at that stage.

From that article, you've provided, I see nothing wrong with abortions before week 3. After week 3, you really can't say it's ethical. What with the development of nerves and a brain, it must be aware of being shredded apart.

This is what Frank has been talking about for the past two weeks (I think it's two weeks). I thought that was evident from his talk on "no brainwaves", although now that I've seen his article, I think he was wrong to talk about fetus and not specify a time point.

By the way, what do you think of chimeras?

I'm glad to hear that you oppose abortion after it is evident that the brain has been formed.

Regarding any type of birth defect or malformation of chromosonal or other structures, it certainly is unfortunate. However, killing a victim of a birth defect or one who is born with a disease or other condition is never the right solution.

However, if the child has a life-threatening birth defect that would make its chances of survival after birth effectively nil, we must do so.

And what do you think of chimeras?

Life does begin at birth - not at the point of conception.

Hair splitting again.
Hope they don't someday decide that life ends at the start of Alzheimers. Me'n you would be in big trouble, CI.

Wolf, are you saying chimeras and other folks with unconventional DNA/genetic profiles should be treated differently, or what?

I guess I would say folks is folks.