What I find most amusing is that if my underaged kid goes to the hospital, they won't touch him unless a 'parent' signs for them. But if my 15 year old daughter goes to PP for birth control pills....parents need not apply!!!
The government has allowed PP to exist so the young will look at PP aka the government, as mommy and daddy. 'We'll take care of you better than mommy and daddy'. PP is the scum of the earth, imho! They entice and latch on to these little impressionable girls and lead them to think of PP as not only their mommy and daddy, but also replacing the moral element with a void.
It is clear that decades of PP, coupled with sex education in schools are not working!!!!! The unborn are still being ripped out of young girls wombs, given birth control pills, (which have many side effects), without their parents knowledge at an alarming rate and it's mostly at the taxpayers expense!!!
It is a deplorable organization!!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
...A human baby would have been the last thing I would have guessed it was. My 6 year old said it was a baby, so now I'm burdened with explaining that it is NOT a baby, it is just a random formation of cells that can be removed like an unsightly mole in a conspicuous spot on your body. After all, I have to teach my kids the important things in life. You can't be 6 months pregnant during spring break in Cancun in your senior year of college. You can't get laid with a 6 month baby bump. I need to set their priorities.
I'm sick of people that make rhetorical comments about rhetorical commentary.
rhet·o·ric [ réttərik ]
noun
Definition:
1. persuasive speech or writing: speech or writing that communicates its point persuasively
2. pretentious words: complex or elaborate language that only succeeds in sounding pretentious
3. empty talk: fine-sounding but insincere or empty language
4. skill with language: the ability to use language effectively, especially to persuade or influence people
5. study of writing or speaking effectively: the study of methods employed to write or speak effectively and persuasively
I certainly haven't been guilty of this. Haven't persuaded anything. I have no skill with language and it isn't fine sounding. And my approach certainly hasn't been glamourous. You give me more credit than I deserve. Thanks
If it was a web page, I would have posted a source URL for it ... but being an email, there was no way to do that. I apologize if I confused anyone as to the origin or source of the post.
I do want to thank you for clearing up my concern Mobile, glad you understood what I was asking for. My apologies for being late with a thank you.
A human and a Chimp have 97% identical DNA. A newborn Chimp LOOKS MORE humans than the Human fetus at many stages of development. Most of us would not recognize a human fetus in it's "reptilian stage"... it's ribbed tail, or head look anything but HUMAN... So if, as you suggest, it's a baby because it looks like a baby... then it's also a lizard, because it LOOKS like a lizard. A human fetus with hoof's, if we are going to use LOOKS as a criteria, is also strikingly NOT human looking.
If how the fetus LOOKS is how you determine if it's a human or not, then the Right To Lifers should proceed to the chimp section of the zoo, instead of clinics.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
A human and a Chimp have 97% identical DNA. A newborn Chimp LOOKS MORE humans than the Human fetus at many stages of development. Most of us would not recognize a human fetus in it's "reptilian stage"... it's ribbed tail, or head look anything but HUMAN... So if, as you suggest, it's a baby because it looks like a baby... then it's also a lizard, because it LOOKS like a lizard. A human fetus with hoof's, if we are going to use LOOKS as a criteria, is also strikingly NOT human looking.
If how the fetus LOOKS is how you determine if it's a human or not, then the Right To Lifers should proceed to the chimp section of the zoo, instead of clinics.
Are you saying a pregnant human may be carrying a chimp? How many chimps have been aborted from human mothers? Your quest to dehumanize human babies is on par with Nazi dehumanization of Jews. Talk about pushing an agenda. Scary!
Are you saying a pregnant human may be carrying a chimp? How many chimps have been aborted from human mothers? Your quest to dehumanize human babies is on par with Nazi dehumanization of Jews. Talk about pushing an agenda. Scary!
If the Chimp LOOKS like a Human, is it a HUMAN? Of course NOT.
If a fetus LOOKS like a Human, is it a HUMAN? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I didn't introduce what a Fetus LOOKS LIKE in this discussion did I? Show an almost totally developed human fetus and it's quite human LOOKING... Show one that is just developing and it looks like a blob of cells... almost no human resemblance. For those who wanted to prove a point on what a fetus LOOKS LIKE... it goes both ways.
I prefer the science to the emotional "looks like" discussion.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
If the Chimp LOOKS like a Human, is it a HUMAN? Of course NOT.
Of course not, it is growing in a female chimp, not a female human. What you can't deny, and you actually agree, is that both fetuses resemble the species that is carrying the fetus. At least you're at the point of understanding that a fertilized mammal egg produces life, regardless of what species of mammal. Now you are a true progressive.
Of course not, it is growing in a female chimp, not a female human. What you can't deny, and you actually agree, is that both fetuses resemble the species that is carrying the fetus. At least you're at the point of understanding that a fertilized mammal egg produces life, regardless of what species of mammal. Now you are a true progressive.
Exactly what point did you hope to convey?
Life begins at conception, regardless if it's a chimp, or a human. That life may become a human being or a chimp... but it's still just a clump of cells at conception, and for months later regardless of what it LOOKS LIKE.
But, to the point of my post... what that fetus LOOKS LIKE has little to do with the end result. My response was to: "LOOKS LIKE A HUMAN" so it's human. We both agree that a fetus "LOOKS LIKE" very different things as it develops... often unrecognizable from the finished product. The "LOOKS LIKE" argument is a deception.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
