Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 05:54 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Chumly wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Hope that clears it up for you, and thank you for asking. Smile


So let's be 100% clear:

Are you saying that a fertilized egg meets your full definition of "human"?

Did I say that? I don't recall saying that. I am ignoring Frank who can't seem to make an argument without bringing in a lot of stuff that none of us have said plus adding an insult to two. I do try to be precise and complete in my statements but admittedly sometimes fall short.

Are you saying your definition of "human" is and only is "members of the homo sapiens species"?


Are you aware of any human beings who are not members of the homo sapiens species? I don't recall that anything else qualified from biology class, but admittedly that was a long time ago.
I am not asking you if that is what you said semantically. I am asking you if that is the intent of your assertions.

So for the sake of edification I will again ask you:

1) Are you saying that a fertilized egg meets your full definition of "human"?

2) Are you saying your definition of "human" is and only is "members of the homo sapiens species"?

3) I now ask you a third and new question: What is the relevance of your question "Are you aware of any human beings who are not members of the homo sapiens species?"
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 06:05 pm
dyslexia wrote:
yes, even "imparied" individuals are considered human beings and are usually considered the majority in the Red States. The primary designation being that they are "born" and of legal voting age. The "unborn" are not so designated being neither "human beings" nor meeting voting criteria.
As usual the famed dyslexia gets the gist of my queries with elan Smile

I tend to pose questions relatively often compared to some. Some (most often the overt literalists) may construe my questions to be niaive interrogatives. They would be mistaken.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Chumly Power!
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 06:09 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Then again maybe the neanderthals were smarter. I bet they considered their children, born and unborn, to be a blessing.
Are you suggesting that we should act like Neanderthals?
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 06:13 pm
Chumly wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Then again maybe the neanderthals were smarter. I bet they considered their children, born and unborn, to be a blessing.
Are you suggesting that we should act like Neanderthals?


Not only is she suggesting it, she is living it! Smile
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 06:19 pm
Intrepid wrote:
Roxxxanne wrote:
Quote:
Are you aware of any human beings who are not members of the homo sapiens species? I don't recall that anything else qualified from biology class, but admittedly that was a long time ago.


This explains a lot. Fox's eduation stopped when she left school. Jeez, one would think she would have googled this before revealing her ignorance.

That there have been many species of humans besides homo sapiens is common knowledge or should be.


Maybe you want to go back to Australopithecus. I think that any intelligent person would recognize that homo sapien is the term used for modern man. Do you know of another?


Read the question again, you changed it.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 06:39 pm
Hmmm, I'm just wondering if Chumly is another Roxxxanne clone? Just too many coincidences not to be suspicious. Smile

But Chumly, or whoever you are, I believe I have adequately answered your questions. Perhaps you could explain why you ask them?
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 06:43 pm
Chumly wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Then again maybe the neanderthals were smarter. I bet they considered their children, born and unborn, to be a blessing.
Are you suggesting that we should act like Neanderthals?


Some already do
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 06:45 pm
Roxxxanne wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Roxxxanne wrote:
Quote:
Are you aware of any human beings who are not members of the homo sapiens species? I don't recall that anything else qualified from biology class, but admittedly that was a long time ago.


This explains a lot. Fox's eduation stopped when she left school. Jeez, one would think she would have googled this before revealing her ignorance.

That there have been many species of humans besides homo sapiens is common knowledge or should be.


Maybe you want to go back to Australopithecus. I think that any intelligent person would recognize that homo sapien is the term used for modern man. Do you know of another?


Read the question again, you changed it.


I changed nothing. I used the quote button. Would you please explain what you are talking about?

Thanks
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 09:15 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Hmmm, I'm just wondering if Chumly is another Roxxxanne clone? Just too many coincidences not to be suspicious. Smile

But Chumly, or whoever you are, I believe I have adequately answered your questions. Perhaps you could explain why you ask them?
Certainly I will! But it is impossible until they are clarified. So please answer the questions. How hard can it be for an intelligent and wise and beautiful and fabulous woman such as yourself? I breathlessly await your lovely answers. The first two only require yes or no and the third is for the purposes of clarification.

1) Are you saying that a fertilized egg meets your full definition of "human"?

2) Are you saying your definition of "human" is and only is "members of the homo sapiens species"?

3) I now ask you a third and new question: What is the relevance of your question "Are you aware of any human beings who are not members of the homo sapiens species?"

If you do not know who I am at least in relation to able2know.com you only need view my posts and for an intelligent and wise and beautiful and fabulous woman such as yourself how hard could that be?
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 09:19 pm
Intrepid wrote:
Some already do
That was an easy gig!
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 09:34 pm
Chumly wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Some already do
That was an easy gig!


He's speaking for himself of course :wink:

Anon
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 09:39 pm
Anon-Voter wrote:
Chumly wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Some already do
That was an easy gig!


He's speaking for himself of course :wink:

Anon


We can always count on you
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 09:41 pm
Intrepid wrote:
Anon-Voter wrote:
Chumly wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Some already do
That was an easy gig!


He's speaking for himself of course :wink:

Anon


We can always count on you


Of course you can!!

Anon
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 10:34 pm
Quote:
Are you aware of any human beings who are not members of the homo sapiens species?
---FF

Quote:
I think that any intelligent person would recognize that homo sapien is the term used for modern man. Do you know of another?
---Intrepid


I changed nothing. I used the quote button. Would you please explain what you are talking about?

Thanks[/quote]

You can't see how these two questions are completely different?
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 10:37 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Hmmm, I'm just wondering if Chumly is another Roxxxanne clone? Just too many coincidences not to be suspicious. Smile


I am really sick and tired of being libeled here by being accused of being someone else. This has really got to stop. I post as Roxxxanne and no one else and never have. Stop libeling me!
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 10:38 pm
Roxxxanne wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Hmmm, I'm just wondering if Chumly is another Roxxxanne clone? Just too many coincidences not to be suspicious. Smile


I am really sick and tired of being libeled here by being accused of being someone else. This has really got to stop. I post as Roxxxanne and no one else and never have. Stop libeling me!


FF needs a brain implant ... that would help a lot!!

Anon
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 10:40 pm
Touchy bunch, ain't they?

:-)
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 10:42 pm
Intrepid wrote:
Touchy bunch, ain't they?

:-)


That's me ... Good ole touchy feely Anon!

Anon
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 10:51 pm
It's now a hoary gig!
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 11:03 pm
Anin
Chumly wrote:
It's now a hoary gig!


I ain no hoar Cool
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Abortion
  3. » Page 42
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/08/2021 at 02:09:57