Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (39057)	7/19/2013 7:09:33 PM
From: 2MAR$	2 Recommendations Recommended By Playing With Profits Solon Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 69300

Stop with the bungled simpleton nonsense, there is no consensus in science when life & personhood begins, there's no consensus of there even being a consensus. The development of a potential human life requires conception as a first step but that is not the same as pregnancy or personhood. There's 50-80% of your definition of "human life" that goes thru a process of 5-8days after fertilization, the eggs never attach to the uterine walls and aborted. So you have millions of abortions taking place in any case, millions of "persons" every year murdered by god then. You can’t reduce a complex reality to nimrod~slogans, when nimrods try to do so, you then minimize the personhood of women and we know that the majority of abortions near 96% are done in the early stages.

To: Greg or e who wrote (39057)	7/19/2013 7:15:17 PM
From: 2MAR$	1 Recommendation Recommended By Playing With Profits Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

In 1973, Harry Blackmun wrote the court opinion, read this brainless dimwit, there is no consensus of when life begins, caught lying again, no surprise there: "We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate."

To: Greg or e who wrote (39057)	7/19/2013 7:58:03 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

Human DNA does not make a human person. Nor can human dna inside a person's body (such as when I swallow phlegm) give such DNA any rights over the body. Rights require both individuation and a personal interest. One cannot force a value on another.

To: Greg or e who wrote (39057)	7/19/2013 8:11:21 PM
From: 2MAR$	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

Stop with the bungled simpleton nonsense, there is no consensus in science when life & personhood begins, there's no consensus of there even being a consensus. The development of a potential human life requires conception as a first step but that is not the same as pregnancy or personhood. There's 50-80% of your definition of "human life" that goes thru a process of 5-8days after fertilization, the eggs never attach to the uterine walls and aborted. So you have millions of abortions taking place in any case, millions of "persons" every year murdered by god then. You can’t reduce a complex reality to nimrod~slogans, when nimrods try to do so, you then minimize the personhood of women and we know that the majority of abortions near 96% are done in the early stages.

To: Greg or e who wrote (39057)	7/19/2013 8:12:19 PM
From: 2MAR$	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

In 1973, Harry Blackmun wrote the Supreme Court opinion there is no consensus of when life begins, caught lying again, no surprise there, what nimrods only know how to do. Read: "We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate