The Koran -- Serious business.

[zoobernut]

I misread the title of this thread as The Korean and expected something about them that we never knew, instantly I thought of them shooting lasers from there hands... Does this make me a bad person?

According to the Koran, Yes.

[Plow]

Or we could just you know not have shit decided across the board by men/those not involved in each specific instance and let a woman decide how she should deal w/ her own body?

Yeah, we really should stop raping every woman that ever gets pregnant, it's bullshit how they have no choice in their own body.

I won't make a large post this time because this point seems to be lost with you and I have said it in every single post.

I am not arguing this or establishing this because I believe that a developing fetus is not human life during 100% of its development. I believe that there is a time at the beginning (again not arguing or making any claims on this time frame) where it is NOT human life yet.

In line with this belief I also don't think that late term abortions should be legal except in extreme circumstances where the mother is in imminent danger of death.

What you're missing in all my posts is that the time when what you've defined as "becoming human life" (i.e. brain forming, memory processes, etc.) happens, occurs pretty much right as people are even beginning to go "oh, I think I might be pregnant."


I wanna reply to neo's bullshit too, but it's more fun to watch the guy that tries to call my baby mama a dirty whore at every possible opportunity act like he's offended at the possibility that someone would suggest someone's a slut (even though he's the only one who has) because they got pregnant by mistake, and fling insults about shit he's too stupid to grasp.

[Neosutra]

In other words, you have nothing to counter the last few posts and have given up.

And you are making HUGE leaps in assumptions when you say things such as "brain formation and memory processes" during the first trimester (when women determine they are pregnant). You are relying on loose statements such as these because you cannot claim that these neural nets are already formed, and instead fall back onto their gradual formation throughout the process to claim that the fetus is thus "human life", as it possesses these beginnings for neural nets.

I dont even think you know what you are trying to say Plow. You admit on one hand that the neural nets are a slow progression, and not merely an "on" point. Yet on another hand you specify that any stage where neural growth is happening (and we just said it happens throughout the process) is thus life and should be protected. You are basically arguing that once the egg is fertilized, it should considered as human life (personhood), and given all the rights of a full human (and above the mother's rights).

How is your argument any different than someone arguing contraceptives are a sin?

And how can you still be playing the responsibility card when you are the poster boy for "well, I guess we can both drop out of school and take care of this child instead of doing the RIGHT thing and postponing it until we are both ready"? I guess the world really did need one more fence builder, and one less engineer. Had you made the right decision, perhaps you would be less of a block headed psycho ultra conservative douche bag, and more of a well rounded educated contributing member of society (and hell, maybe even an engineer by now).

[zoobernut]

What you're missing in all my posts is that the time when what you've defined as "becoming human life" (i.e. brain forming, memory processes, etc.) happens, occurs pretty much right as people are even beginning to go "oh, I think I might be pregnant."

No really I got that. And I still disagree with you. I don't think we know that as fact. If we did then this would not even be a debate.

I think it is funny that you just continually say that I don't get the point of your posts and use that as a foundation for your argument. Really I do get the point I understand what you are saying, I just disagree with you about it.

That fundamental disagreement is why abortion is a moral personal issue rather than a political, or religious issue. And also why it should be up to each individual to decide for themselves what is right and not.

[greenhills]

men argueing about abortion..... 1 side trying to justify forcing women to have babies, the other side forcing their choice (to not have babies). how about you guys just come to the agreement that neither of you should have a say in it?

[Plow]

In other words, you have nothing to counter the last few posts and have given up.

Oh that's absolutely brilliant, coming from you.

Care to respond to the question of how offering adoption services to those that *choose* to use them, and caring for children and the elderly is "those evil moderates pushing their anti-abortion agenda?"


Or are you just going to keep running as far and as fast as you can from every reasonable point of discussion?

And you are making HUGE leaps in assumptions when you say things such as "brain formation and memory processes" during the first trimester (when women determine they are pregnant). You are relying on loose statements such as these because you cannot claim that these neural nets are already formed, and instead fall back onto their gradual formation throughout the process to claim that the fetus is thus "human life", as it possesses these beginnings for neural nets.

No, neo, if you actually cared enough about the things you're trying to argue, and weren't just looking for ways to excuse your lack of willingness to take responsibility for your actions, you'd research this shit.

First off, they're *neural networks*. Your repeated use of the terminology "nets" is an attempt to portray it as some little unvarying chunks that stack up and eventually get "turned on." When the first neural network forms, this is the beginning of nervous processing. This continues throughout our entire life.

You don't know what the hell you're talking about, and you're trying to make the argument that there's some point when "enough" neural networks have established that it "turns on" and becomes human. This is simply not the case. The processes and functions occurring from the very start of neuromere presence continue to occur and constitute everything we call learning, memory, etc., throughout life.

I dont even think you know what you are trying to say Plow. You admit on one hand that the neural nets are a slow progression, and not merely an "on" point. Yet on another hand you specify that any stage where neural growth is happening (and we just said it happens throughout the process) is thus life and should be protected. You are basically arguing that once the egg is fertilized, it should considered as human life (personhood), and given all the rights of a full human (and above the mother's rights).

No, neo, you're just too dumb to get it. I'm saying that the process of forming neural networks continues throughout life, and that using it as the basis of judging when something becomes human is misleading.

I've gone ahead and pinpointed when it starts, anyway, though.

How is your argument any different than someone arguing contraceptives are a sin?

Because mine factors in the reality that something beyond existing has to occur for sperm and eggs to even have the remotest chance of fertilizing.

And how can you still be playing the responsibility card when you are the poster boy for "well, I guess we can both drop out of school and take care of this child instead of doing the RIGHT thing and postponing it until we are both ready"? I guess the world really did need one more fence builder, and one less engineer. Had you made the right decision, perhaps you would be less of a block headed psycho ultra conservative douche bag, and more of a well rounded educated contributing member of society (and hell, maybe even an engineer by now).

I'd tell you, but then you'd end up realizing how incredibly retarded you look with this line of attempted bashing, and it would be way, way less fun.

You could try reading more of my posts on these topics, though, because not only have I openly stated what's making you look so stupid, but if you were nearly as smart as you think you are, you'd have picked up on it anyway without me actually needing to have said it anyway.

I'll give you a hint: I didn't have to be told to realize you'd been through it and chosen abortion.

No really I got that. And I still disagree with you. I don't think we know that as fact. If we did then this would not even be a debate.

I think it is funny that you just continually say that I don't get the point of your posts and use that as a foundation for your argument. Really I do get the point I understand what you are saying, I just disagree with you about it.

This isn't multi-universal physics. We *do* know when the brain starts to form. We *do* know when the processes we call memorization begin.

You just made a statement that's intensely ignorant to the main point I'm trying to establish to you, then followed it up with how I'm incorrectly accusing you of not getting the point.

It's nothing to disagree about, it's like going into the LHD thread and going "clearly all the other galaxies are just a pretty display, we don't actually know anything about them."

Except, like, worse, because we know sooooooo much more about human development than solar.

That fundamental disagreement is why abortion is a moral personal issue rather than a political, or religious issue. And also why it should be up to each individual to decide for themselves what is right and not.

I can't believe I'm seeing this, the pro choice side using scientific ignorance *against* what they consider a religious argument.

[Plow]

men argueing about abortion..... 1 side trying to justify forcing women to have babies, the other side forcing their choice (to not have babies). how about you guys just come to the agreement that neither of you should have a say in it?

I don't ask for any say in rather a woman gets pregnant in the least, unless it's with me. I'd like to think I have the right to a little input then, though.

[Neosutra]

Care to respond to the question of how offering adoption services to those that *choose* to use them, and caring for children and the elderly is "those evil moderates pushing their anti-abortion agenda?"

Because if they were simply offering these services, then they would be a secular organization with charitable goals. However, they are not a secular organization that just wants to help pregnant women. They are an organization that specifically attempts to persuade women to keep their pregnancies, when the best answer is often to postpone it. I know several couples that cannot have children, but that doesnt mean that any fertile girl on the planet should be used as an incubator for that couple. That organization is nothing more than a push for the anti-choice movement, and a hinderance to women that are trying to make the decision between postponing parenthood, and taking the embryo to full gestation.

No, neo, if you actually cared enough about the things you're trying to argue, and weren't just looking for ways to excuse your lack of willingness to take responsibility for your actions, you'd research this shit.

Again, please show me what I am not understanding. You repeatively keep telling people that we "just dont understand" your point. As zoober said, YES we do understand your point, and we disagree. You have no data to back your side up, if you even know what your side is beyond "it's life at conception!".

And nice job still not answering the question of where you think we should state human life begins and not allow abortion. Keep dodging it please.

First off, they're *neural networks*. Your repeated use of the terminology "nets" is an attempt to portray it as some little unvarying chunks that stack up and eventually get "turned on." When the first neural network forms, this is the beginning of nervous processing. This continues throughout our entire life.

Nets is a short word for networks you babbling idiot. We are BOTH stating that it is a gradual process. I am just stating that you cant assign "human life" to the fetus, just because it is BEGINNING to establish these neural networks (that continue to grow through and after the birthing process). We are stating that this is NOT an acceptable criteria for personhood. This isn't some "misunderstanding" of the fetal development process. I realize your sophomoric perception of the world leads you to believe anyone that disagrees with you just "doesnt get it", but Im afraid to break it to you: We just dont agree with you.

You don't know what the hell you're talking about, and you're trying to make the argument that there's some point when "enough" neural networks have established that it "turns on" and becomes human. This is simply not the case. The processes and functions occurring from the very start of neuromere presence continue to occur and constitute everything we call learning, memory, etc., throughout life.

Actually, I quite clearly stated it was a transition and was arguing against your declaration of the fetus being life at any determinant stage.

No, neo, you're just too dumb to get it. I'm saying that the process of forming neural networks continues throughout life, and that using it as the basis of judging when something becomes human is misleading.

Really, because you tried to use neural development as a basis for not aborting 2 month old fetus.. I dont even need to argue with you, you are doing a good enough job arguing with yourself.

Because mine factors in the reality that something beyond existing has to occur for sperm and eggs to even have the remotest chance of fertilizing.

Because accidents dont happen right? Because the conservative party hasnt done everything it can to remove safe sex teachings in schools and replace them with failed abstinence lesson plans that absolutely do not work? Because having sex should only be to make babies right?

I'll give you a hint: I didn't have to be told to realize you'd been through it and chosen abortion.

Ya I know Plow, you know everything about me, even though EVERY attempt of yours to classify not only the physical happenings in my life, but the psychological state of my being has been so grossly off that I cannot imagine how you can even understand your own perception. It just goes back to your perception of everyone around you. You are so massively selfconscious of your own shortcomings that you try and make up with it by assuming you are smarter than the people that disagree with you, and assuming that people with different opinions just "don't get it". You are the epitome of sophomoric.

Atheists are not just mad at their parents Plow.
No, you havent worked harder before you were 18 than I have in my entire life (or before I was 18 for that matter lol).
No you dont/cant have an expert understanding of physics with 15 minutes and google.
No, it is not responsible to drop out of school and add another shitbag to society to satisfy your cravings to control the one woman on the planet that would let you touch her.

This isn't multi-universal physics. We *do* know when the brain starts to form. We *do* know when the processes we call memorization begin.

Oh, thought it was a gradual process? Dance in circles more please.

Except, like, worse, because we know sooooooo much more about human development than solar.

You can state this with 100% positive affirmation because you have an expert understanding of everything we know about both solar system formation and human development right? Oh right, you have google, what was I thinking.

I don't ask for any say in rather a woman gets pregnant in the least, unless it's with me. I'd like to think I have the right to a little input then, though

But when they do get pregnant, you sure as hell want a say in whether they carry it to term or not, regardless of whether they are not ready for it, or where the fetus is in the growth process. I mean come on, the sperm and egg have touched, IT HAS A SOUL NOW! And no, your part in the birthing process is not pulling out after the 8 seconds of you sprawling around while your GF pretends to be satisfied. She is the one that has to carry it to term and actually birth the child.

Oh, I have a hole in my fence btw, can you come take a look at it? I dont have time, due to staying in school and finishing my engineering/physics degree =/.

[Plow]

Because if they were simply offering these services, then they would be a secular organization with charitable goals. However, they are not a secular organization that just wants to help pregnant women. They are an organization that specifically attempts to persuade women to keep their pregnancies, when the best answer is often to postpone it. I know several couples that cannot have children, but that doesnt mean that any fertile girl on the planet should be used as an incubator for that couple. That organization is nothing more than a push for the anti-choice movement, and a hinderance to women that are trying to make the decision between postponing parenthood, and taking the embryo to full gestation.

Please, show me LSS "pushing" "anti-choice."

Btw, I love how you're super offended at being called pro-abortion but throw around "anti-choice" at every possible opportunity.

Guess what... adoption is a CHOICE, too. Just like having sex is a CHOICE.

LSS is there for people that CHOOSE to use the adoption service, and for children whom had no choice in the matter, as well as elderly in similar situations.

Again, please show me what I am not understanding. You repeatively keep telling people that we "just dont understand" your point. As zoober said, YES we do understand your point, and we disagree. You have no data to back your side up, if you even know what your side is beyond "it's life at conception!".

You mean like I did in the very next paragraph?

And nice job still not answering the question of where you think we should state human life begins and not allow abortion. Keep dodging it please.

I gave you as close to a definition for this as I believe there is, try reading the thread. Maybe I'll explain it again the next time you try to ask. Or maybe we'll get a full page of you demanding answers that were provided on the previous page in this thread just like we did in the last.

Nets is a short word for networks you babbling idiot.

In technology. Net is not an acceptable use for neural networks. Either you realize the impact it has on the discussion and are using it intentionally to minimalize the impact of the phrase neural networks, or are really just that stupid. Not really sure.

We are BOTH stating that it is a gradual process. I am just stating that you cant assign "human life" to the fetus, just because it is BEGINNING to establish these neural networks (that continue to grow through and after the birthing process). We are stating that this is NOT an acceptable criteria for personhood. This isn't some "misunderstanding" of the fetal development process. I realize your sophomoric perception of the world leads you to believe anyone that disagrees with you just "doesnt get it", but Im afraid to break it to you: We just dont agree with you.

That's funny, seeing how that whole paragraph is parrotting shit I already said.

My entire point was that mental capacity is not an acceptable criteria for "personhood," because the point was made that they shouldn't be considered people because their brains aren't finished developing (which they never are.)

Actually, I quite clearly stated it was a transition and was arguing against your declaration of the fetus being life at any determinant stage.

Then what the fuck are you trying to say? The bulk of your post this far is that we can't determine when it becomes a person. How does that give us the right to decide when it's ok to kill it off?

Really, because you tried to use neural development as a basis for not aborting 2 month old fetus.. I dont even need to argue with you, you are doing a good enough job arguing with yourself.

Holy crap you're stupid. I was arguing *AGAINST* the idea that the current stage of brain development is a legitimate method of determining when an embryo becomes a human.

I know the concept of reasonably explaining *why* something wouldn't work even if it were used, rather than simply declaring shit's right or wrong because I said so is way, way above your head, but come on, stop making yourself look like such an imbecile.

Because accidents dont happen right?

Oh, I drove drunk and accidentally killed someone. It was an accident, therefore it's not my responsibility, and I should bear no consequences.

Sorry Mr. fine China store owner, it was an accident when I fell over and destroyed a few thousand dollars of your inventory. Have fun fixing that!

Because the conservative party

"The conservative party?" Never mind, keep up the incredible ineptitude, it's mind blowingly hilarious.

hasnt done everything it can to remove safe sex teachings in schools and replace them with failed abstinence lesson plans that absolutely do not work?

Well, first off, your "conservative party" would have to exist to have "done everything it can." Secondly, no, the vast majority of people attempting this have not done everything they can. The people I know that believed that extremely strongly took their kids out of the public education system. There's no more powerful statement than to actually practice what you're saying yourself.

Because having sex should only be to make babies right?

Yes neo, I'm totally against birth control, I'm totally against women having sex after menopause, there's no possible way for sex to be reasonable without it being for the intent of having a child. Have fun sigging that out of context.


There is a difference between having sex for the purpose of making babies, and taking responsibility for the choices you make when they result in bringing a life into the world.

If you going to the pet store might result in them putting a kitten in your hands and shoving you out the door, and you can't support a kitten, don't go to the fucking pet store.

Ya I know Plow, you know everything about me, even though EVERY attempt of yours to classify not only the physical happenings in my life, but the psychological state of my being has been so grossly off that I cannot imagine how you can even understand your own perception.

I was totally wrong about your parents being religious. I was totally wrong about the fact that you're a self-centered, closed minded asshole that thinks he's the only one with the right to throw around labels. I was totally wrong with calling you out on a massive level of hypocrisy the first time I ever responded to you.

And just so you know, I thought about commenting about the fact that you went through it and had an abortion before, but I have the respect for the human mind to allow you to bring up your own private business when you choose to, and not fling insults about it at every possible opportunity.

It just goes back to your perception of everyone around you. You are so massively selfconscious of your own shortcomings that you try and make up with it by assuming you are smarter than the people that disagree with you, and assuming that people with different opinions just "don't get it". You are the epitome of sophomoric.

No, neo. I have thoroughly explained where the misunderstandings are. I do not equate "quantity of knowledge" with intelligence the way you do.

It's amazing how it never occurs to you that every time you attempt to make any kind of mental analysis of a persona it's a mirror of what everyone tells you about yourself.

Atheists are not just mad at their parents Plow.

No, but you are.

No, you havent worked harder before you were 18 than I have in my entire life (or before I was 18 for that matter lol).

You may or may not have worked as much and as hard as I have. But since you don't get it, let me point it out to you:

You tried to insult the act of dealing with a pregnancy without aborting it as "putting off contributing to society."

I used an extreme counter example to display how incredibly wrong you are. During the time that my girlfriend was pregnant, I took off school to go *WORK* and support her. I paid her bills, I kept a roof over her head, I took her to doctors, I did what a responsible person does when they *CHOOSE* to put the responsibility of bringing a child into the world into their own hands.

And you come back with crying about how being in the army is so hard.

No, it is not responsible to drop out of school and add another shitbag to society to satisfy your cravings to control the one woman on the planet that would let you touch her.

If I was like you, I wouldn't even be bothering with this shit. I'd just tell you how torturing people and killing innocent civilians isn't half as hard as the shit I've done, without actually describing what that entails.

The day I turned 18 I'd been working my ass off putting food on your table every summer for years, done my time in fast food joints like McDonald's and Sonic, worked at a nice restaurant, finished enough of a semester of the early math and sciences courses for engineering (to cover the gap from leaving high school early, and while taking honors English) to not have to take any of them again despite not getting any credit hours, worked (somewhat illegally) at Rapid Brake & Muffler to support a home and a pregnant woman and been through 8 months of a pregnancy.


Fuck your "leaving school and putting off being a contributing member of society." I went to the dean and told him what was happening, he said if we did it right then I could get my money back. I went home to work and keep her happy, you think I fucking took off to sit on a couch and convince her not to have an abortion?

Hell, you probably do, because it's what you'd have done if you were in that situation and didn't want an abortion.

No you dont/cant have an expert understanding of physics with 15 minutes and google.

Again, I never said I could. You tried to tell me I'm incapable of understanding anything at all and call me dumb. I called you out and said to test me.

You still to this day have done nothing but turn tail at the face of the challenge and try to turn it into something it's not so you can argue against it. I.E. build a massive straw man out of it.

Again, you fling insults wildly then get all upset when people throw them right back in your face.

Oh, thought it was a gradual process? Dance in circles more please.

Here's a hint, mr scientific genius: Gradual processes still have a *beginning*.

You can state this with 100% positive affirmation because you have an expert understanding of everything we know about both solar system formation and human development right? Oh right, you have google, what was I thinking.

I can state this because it's common fucking sense. Have you even read your own favorite thread about the LHC? Think of the LHC as one of those "incubators" you like to refer to women that choose not to have abortions as. Now imagine where we'd be if that was a relatively old technology that's been working incredibly for decades now. That's where prenatal development study is at.

But when they do get pregnant, you sure as hell want a say in whether they carry it to term or not, regardless of whether they are not ready for it, or where the fetus is in the growth process. I mean come on, the sperm and egg have touched, IT HAS A SOUL NOW! And no, your part in the birthing process is not pulling out after the 8 seconds of you sprawling around while your GF pretends to be satisfied. She is the one that has to carry it to term and actually birth the child.

Yes, they've taken the responsibility for childbearing on when they took the necessary steps for it to occur.

Oh, I have a hole in my fence btw, can you come take a look at it? I dont have time, due to staying in school and finishing my engineering/physics degree =/.

lol, keep em going, it reminds me of when my 6 year old cousin got 2 jokes crossed up and when we were all laughing our asses off about it, thought he had done it right



in before neo doesn't read my post and responds with how I've said it all before, never realizing it's direct replies to questions he's asked before, a few ridiculously disrespectful comments about how superior he is to anyone that disagrees with him, and a grand finale of one more of the massively lulzy misplaced parenting/job/education insults

[zoobernut]

So Plow taking away mental capacity as a criteria,

Do you believe a fertilized egg is a human being and aborting a fertilized egg would be murder?

Do you believe a zygote is a human being and aborting a zygote would be murder?

At what point do you believe that a developing fetus transitions from a cluster of cells to an actual human being?

[Plow]

Since it's you, and not neo:

But, personally, the state of the brain is not the deciding factor. Essentially at the point where the cells become a blastocyst, the closest to your demeaning terminology of a "clump of cells," it's already far beyond a fertilized egg and behaving as a functional being, and one that will become a human unless there are significant flaws or damaging impacts.

This is well before it's remotely reasonably detected, and even the most effective of modern methods being used regularly will require some element of luck to find the trace signs this early.

So Plow taking away mental capacity as a criteria,

Do you believe a fertilized egg is a human being and aborting a fertilized egg would be murder?

Do you believe a zygote is a human being and aborting a zygote would be murder?

At what point do you believe that a developing fetus transitions from a cluster of cells to an actual human being?

As far as the direct questions as to embryonic states, well, I haven't really got firm beliefs in decisions at that stage.

Again, I feel like by the time it's gotten to the stage where it's reasonably detectable, it's well into the point where I have no doubt whatsoever that, barring problematic factors, it's clearly no longer a "future" human but now a "developing" human.


The reality behind this stage (prior to, and the process of, blastocyst formation) is that the only times that issue really arises is in scientific research. The question of where the line has to be drawn for that is incredibly tough. As much as I hate to see someone like neo who wishes desperately that there was no moral line here having an impact on the discussion, this is one of the key issues of our age, and I'll make no proclamation to have a definitive answer.

That's why it should really be another thread, because this needs to be an issue approached in a cooperative manner by all human beings, both inclusive and regardless of religious groundings for moral decisions. Abortion itself isn't even the primary discussion here, but the creation and destruction of life in general.

I hate to even think about limiting the potential progress from certain directions this could go, but I hate to think about the potential lack of respect for life in the process, too.


Does it seem wrong to prevent the possible saving of lives and improvement of quality of life for multitudes of people for the sake of "a ball of cells?" Absolutely.

But it also seems pretty wrong to decide that we can just create a human life and then toss it away in the name of someone else's pain.

Fortunately there are other ways this research can progress without direct creation and intentional destruction, which seems like the best middle ground to me. Slower progress, but without, in my eyes, infringing upon human rights.

[Neosutra]

Gotcha Plow:

Im just killing innocent civilians and torturing people as an army soldier.

Birth control never fails.

Life begins at conception.

Agencies that pressure women into having babies when they are not ready are "helping them". You did the right thing by dropping out and becoming a fence builder when your GF got knocked up, because you entered the work force early and thus helped our society more! (Lets not consider the impact of having less educated workers in the force, rather than more).

Straw Man, insult insult, "I know everything about you Neo", "everyone that disagrees with me just doesnt understand".

People like you are the main reason I support the abortion argument.

You can cut the endless bullshit you post here and just state "I believe life begins at conception and everyone else is wrong", as well as "and what a woman does with her body isnt her business!". Because that is all you are saying, over and over.

And you still didnt state where you think the reasonable point is. "Reasonably detectable" is a VERY loose statement.

Oh, and sorry about the fence thing, I already got it fixed. Had a mexican friend come over and fix it for 20 bucks. Unskilled labor is where its at brother.

edit: Nice side derail into stem cell research. Doesnt surprise me one bit you are also against these areas of research that have the potential for amazing and vast medical advancements. Idiots like you are fighting everyday to keep us in the stone ages, all in the name of your own ignorance.

[Plow]

Awesome, the best part is how he's even exposing the reality that he's literally the kind of person that actually wants people to be killed off because he feels they're inferior. I wonder how many people picked up on that before that post, too.


You're right, though, neo.

in before neo doesn't read my post and responds with how I've said it all before, never realizing it's direct replies to questions he's asked before, a few ridiculously disrespectful comments about how superior he is to anyone that disagrees with him, and a grand finale of one more of the massively lulzy misplaced parenting/job/education insults

I don't know you at all.

[zoobernut]

Well that is very well thought out and put. I guess that is really the crux of the argument and one that neither of us will ever change the mind of the other. I don't agree with you that a developing fetus becomes "human" and has to be protected as a human quite that early. I believe it takes longer than that for the fetus to become human.

[Neosutra]

Plow, me responding to exactly what you said is me being predictable? Wow, you should be a psychic.

In before Plow responds to this post! So predictable.

But seriously, why are you arguing more than "I believe life begins at conception". Because you obviously dont agree with the abortion pill either, as you have stated that women that simply get pregnant (regardless of the reason), have to "take responsibility" for it.

And this is my favorite part: Do you also believe abstinence only programs work? What about sex education? Are contraceptives immoral? You are preventing future life! Come on Plow, we have future fence builders to make.

[Plow]

Maybe I'll explain it again the next time you try to ask. Or maybe we'll get a full page of you demanding answers that were provided on the previous page in this thread just like we did in the last.

Oh baby, I love it when you prove me wrong.

[Neosutra]

That has no relation anything I said.

This isnt fence building, put a little more thought into it.

[Plow]

Ok, neo, I'll break the news to you. I'm not a fence builder, nor have I ever been involved in a fence building company. I'm going to school while working my ass off for my parents to keep up this 4 bedroom, 2 story + walk out basement house with a pool and a barn on 5 acres I live alone in.


But go ahead, keep trying to compare me to those damn dirty Mexican slaves you hate so much.


But I'm still not explaining why you're missing all that, it's going to be too much fun watching you try to come up with ridiculous misguided insults to try to for getting things so entirely wrong.

[Rhinox]

Was that a RL card you just threw out?.

[Plow]

Was that a RL card you just threw out?.

rofl yes rhinox, it's me starting the rl shit, u got meh