Brainless baby turns 1.

[zoobernut]

I've said from the beginning It's a Husk. and even acknowledged and conceded that its a Human Husk. Whats your beef again?

Husk denotes less of a human. You are making a semantics argument and you don't even understand the words being argued. Calling it a human husk is retarded. It is a human. If you want to say it is less of a person fine go ahead if you think that in order to be considered a person you have to have a cutoff level of brain functionality.

You even quoted yourself saying it is a husk and its not human and genetic husk and all that crap. Those statements have no meaning.

[Rhinox]

Husk denotes less of a human. You are making a semantics argument and you don't even understand the words being argued. Calling it a human husk is retarded. It is a human. If you want to say it is less of a person fine go ahead if you think that in order to be considered a person you have to have a cutoff level of brain functionality.

You even quoted yourself saying it is a husk and its not human and genetic husk and all that crap. Those statements have no meaning.

Holy shit now who is arguing semantics. Whats the difference between a 'person husk' and a 'human husk'


and I conceded its Human. A perfectly fine genetically human husk given the circumstances.

[Kuya]

Human connotes biology, and person connotes psychology. It is accurate to say that the baby is human, but it is not a person because it does not have the ability to develop a personality. People don't understand why you're making that distinction, human husk, when you can say the much more accurate phrase that the baby is not a person.

[Rhinox]

lol

[zoobernut]

Exactly what Kuya said. Rhinox you are failing very hard at reading comprehension here. I stated very clearly that the word human denotes biology and person is connected to personality or psychology. The reason that human husk is a retarded term is that you are implying on a biological level that it is less human when in fact that is false.

[Chun Liroy]

Human Husk

Person Husk. Say it with me now. P-e-r-s-o-n husk. Not Human Husk. Person. Also, Lrn2img.

[Kuya]

lol

Or you could stick to that reply. Oh well, tried to help you. How unfortunate.

[Rhinox]

are people really upset over the semantics of it? Is calling something not a person less offensive then calling something not human?


Spilled milk here guys.

[Rhinox]

Or you could stick to that reply. Oh well, tried to help you. How unfortunate.

I apologize. I didn't know how to respond to that post so I went with your default response to something like that.

Thank you.

[Rhinox]

Person Husk. Say it with me now. P-e-r-s-o-n husk. Not Human Husk. Person. Also, Lrn2img.

Hey, Stop talking to me.

[Kuya]

If you think it was over offensiveness and not over accuracy, sure, whatever floats your boat.

[Chun Liroy]

Who's arguing semantics now?

[Xno Kappa]

Rhinox, I try to stay out of these kind of topics due to the raw emotion it can involve sometimes but let it go. Zoobernut pretty much picked your argument apart. Semantics over the reasoning to be objective always fails.

[Kyte]

In biology thinking is the stimulation of neurons. Are you ghoing to argue with me about what thought is?

In biology, the stimulation of neurons is the stimulation of neurons. "Thinking" may involve the stimulation of neurons, but the stimulation of neurons doesn't necessarily mean something is "thinking."

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

I'm disappointed in how little you all learned from movies as a kid

http://www.dedroidify.com/blogimages/oz_scarecrow_1.jpg

[Chun Liroy]

Page1 etc.

[Mojo]

Human or husk, it's all semantics. That's a stupid point to argue about in a situation like this. It's an abomination that barely resembles a human, dead or alive. If it was given the ability to express rational thought for at least a moment, it would opt for its own death. Should just let it die and accept that these things are part of life.

[BRP]

Is it wrong to eat a baby, if it doesn't have a brain?

[Guitarman]

Human or husk, it's all semantics. That's a stupid point to argue about in a situation like this. It's an abomination that barely resembles a human, dead or alive. If it was given the ability to express rational thought for at least a moment, it would opt for its own death. Should just let it die and accept that these things are part of life.

Right, because looking at your own child and deciding it should die is an easy decision for any parent without serious issues. And don't say you could do it, it's not an easy thing.

[Mojo]

Could certainly do it. Clutching on in desperate hopes like that is by far worse than doing the proper thing.