quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: bounty44

it would help in trying to understand what you are saying if you didn't write like you are on quaaludes.

Unless one has an extensive background in the abuse of perscription drugs how would one know the symptoms?




“The zygote is human life….there is one fact that no one can deny; Human beings begin at conception.”

Which med school did you learn that piece of shit in?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: bounty44

it would help in trying to understand what you are saying if you didn't write like you are on quaaludes.

Unless one has an extensive background in the abuse of perscription drugs how would one know the symptoms?




“The zygote is human life….there is one fact that no one can deny; Human beings begin at conception.”

Which med school did you learn that piece of shit in?

If you'd take the time to read, it was quoted from several Embryology texts...You know, the books they use to teach future doctors.

That is not true. Your first link is to:


(International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 1999, 19:3/4:22-36 (in press)

WHEN DO HUMAN BEINGS BEGIN?

"SCIENTIFIC" MYTHS AND SCIENTIFIC FACTSDianne N. Irving, Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D.

Please note that there are no m.d. listed in this paper (not a text book) which was delivered to a sociology meeting and not a medical meeting.  Your second link is to a blog and not a text book

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Every single person going in for an abortion is going in to kill a human being.


You are a phoquing liar. Perhaps if you were to actually consult a doctor instead of your imaginary friend you would not put your feet in your mouth so often.

Chiropractor for fucks sake

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Every single person going in for an abortion is going in to kill a human being.


You are a phoquing liar. Perhaps if you were to actually consult a doctor instead of your imaginary friend you would not put your feet in your mouth so often.

.


And I didn't need to talk to God or Jesus, I learned all this in MY Embryology classes when I became a doctor.

Chiropractor for fucks sake

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Actually, it IS true. Perhaps if I make the relevant part bold AND italicize it for you?
More likely if you were to actually post some validation for the opinion posted instead of some sociologist opinion.


“That is, in human reproduction, when sperm joins ovum, these two individual cells cease to be, and their union generates a new and distinct organism. This organism is a whole, though in the beginning developmentally immature, member of the human species. Readers need not take our word for this: They can consult any of the standard human-embryology texts, such as Moore and Persaud’s The Developing Human, Larsen’s Human Embryology, Carlson’s Human Embryology & Developmental Biology, and O’Rahilly and Mueller’s Human Embryology & Teratology.”
– Dr. Robert George

Perhaps you'd like me to dig out MY Embryology textbook? Or the one being used at U. Of M. Medical School?

Nah...we will setttle for you producing any m.d. who will agree that a fetus is a human being?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

your question---though im doubting its sincerity---is somewhat predicated on the law (which is based on liberal "morality") recognizing that the embryo/fetus/blob of tissue is indeed a human being, which it unfortunately it doesn't. its one reason why left and right argue over what to call it and the left refuses to see it as a baby.

but that said, in answer to your question, no---no more than someone who is killed in a car accident that is purely an accident. why should she?

Actually, there were a few rare cases (in the 90s, I believe) where the PPLs tried to prosecute women who smoked, while pregnant simultaneous to screaming about a "woman's 'right' to commit mur choose".

They kind of "backed off" of that when their hypocrisy was highlighted, but there are still some laws that don't seem to fall in line with the left's supposed belief about a woman's invariable "right".



Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

On second thought:
"I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception."

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania
The good professor is an M.D.

Got a link to the good doctor?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

On second thought:
"I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception."

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania
The good professor is an M.D.

Got a link to the good doctor?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

It is difficult for me to comprehend a society that allows several 9/11's of its citizens to die annually due to gun violence, and seems relaxed with the criminal political negligence that allows this to occur every year, while it responds so aggressively to the one 9/11 that actually happened.

Yep. I've been picking up the odd bit about the generally flabbergasted view of this amongst Australians.

One mass-shooting in 1996, followed by stringent gun laws (with the very right wing PM John Howard at the helm)... the result: no more mass shootings to date.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/10/03/3708876/australians-are-disgusted-at-the-american-response-to-the-oregon-gun-massacre/

And this week there was an attack on an Austrailian Police station, something that hasn't happened here in decades.
Since they passed that law, our crime rate, murder rate, and murder rate with firearms have all gained greatly on thiers. This is because ours has dropped nearly 50% (while gun ownership has doubled) and while they have had no mass shootings their crime rate has remained essentially the same. A fact Austrailians have verified repeatedly. At the same time as the Australian mass shooting, they declined to pass any such laws, and they too have had no mass shootings. And over the whole time period there crime rates have been comprable to Australians.

I am getting really tired of you presenting either false or misleading claims about crime rates here, and how they compare to the US. You have done this repeatedly and despite being corrected on many occasions, are still presenting false and/or misleading stats.

quote:

And this week there was an attack on an Austrailian Police station, something that hasn't happened here in decades.

This was a 15 year old boy, apparently acting for IS (ie motivation was terrorist, not criminal) shooting a police employee outside a police station. It is the only incident of this kind to have happened for as long as I can remember. It takes a great leap of imagination to describe this as an "attack" on a police station. And it mischievous and misleading to include such incidents in a discussion of ordinary crime. Imagine how adding the fatalities from 9/11 to the US murder rate would skew and distort that figure - you have done precisely the same here.

quote:

Since they passed that law, our crime rate, murder rate, and murder rate with firearms have all gained greatly on thiers. This is because ours has dropped nearly 50% (while gun ownership has doubled) and while they have had no mass shootings their crime rate has remained essentially the same.

This is highly misleading. US murder rates virtually doubled at the end of the 1960s from c4.5 per 100,000 to a peak of 10.2 in 1980, plateauing from the early 70s to the mid-90s at about 9 per 100,000, then declining at the end of the 90s to 5.7 per 100,000, then easing gradually to the current figure of 4.5 per 100,000. IOW murder rates spiked in the US during the 70s.80s and early 90s and now have returned to the 1960 levels. So your claims reflect a decline from the peak of a spike, hardly a representative picture. It is highly misleading to represent this decline as "greatly gaining" on some other country's crime rates.

While US gun sales have increased, it is a fact that the % of households owning guns has halved, reflecting a large drop in the number of households where one adult or more is a hunter. http://www.norc.org/PDFs/GSS%20Reports/GSS_Trends%20in%20Gun%20Ownership_US_1972-2014.pdf

It seems to be the case that a diminishing percentage of gun owners are making multiple purchases of guns.

quote:

A fact Austrailians (sic)have verified repeatedly.

Perhaps you will cite an example of this as off the top of my head, I can't remember any Australian "verifying" your claims but I can remember Australian posters here disputing and contradicting some of your more ridiculous claims about Australian crime rates.

quote:

At the same time as the Australian mass shooting, they declined to pass any such laws, and they too have had no mass shootings. And over the whole time period there crime rates have been comprable (sic) to Australians.

This makes no sense whatsoever. Who are the "they" you are referring to?
Whoever the "they"might be, it is clear that US murder rates and Australian murder rates are not roughly the same or even "comparable" at all. The Australian rate is consistent at about 1 per 100,000 of population, whereas the US rate fluctuates between 4.5 and 10 times greater than the Australian rate, as has been shown above.
"The rate of homicide victimisation (in Australia) has never exceeded two per 100,000 in the 17 years for which data are available. Victimisation has stayed at one per 100,000 since 2007" http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent%20crime.html


SOURCES: All Australian statistics are taken from the Australian Institute of Criminology at http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent%20crime.html Can I suggest you use this authoritative source for any Australian stats you may like to cite in future.

All US stats are taken from http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm which collates data from over 18,000 US law enforcement agencies, except where otherwise cited.
[/quote/]

I agree that if it was a terrorist action it doesn't count in a discussion of criminal activity. I only saw the early reports while they were saying that they did not know why he did this. That said, it did not stop gunaphobes frome trying to make hay over the terrorist attacks in Garland TX, Fort Hood, and agaist the recruiters in PA.
I said nothing about the exact levels of crime in Australia I only pointed out that New Zeland has a comprable crime rate. If your side can use terror attacks why can't mine?

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to tweakabelle)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

The most fundamental difference is that a fetus is totally dependent on a woman's body to survive. Anti-choicers might argue that born human beings can be entirely dependent on other people too, but the crucial difference is that they are not dependent on one, specific person to the exclusion of all others. Anybody can take care of a newborn infant (or disabled person), but only that pregnant woman can nurture her fetus. She can’t hire someone else to do it.

Another key difference is that a fetus doesn't just depend on a woman's body for survival, it actually resides inside her body. Human beings must, by definition, be separate individuals. They do not gain the status of human being by virtue of living inside the body of another human being—the very thought is inherently ridiculous, even offensive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

On second thought:
"I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception."

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania
The good professor is an M.D.

Got a link to the good doctor?

I do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

On second thought:
"I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception."

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania
The good professor is an M.D.

Got a link to the good doctor?

I do.

Two little words that can get you in so much trouble.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

On second thought:
"I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception."

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania
The good professor is an M.D.

Got a link to the good doctor?

I do.

Two little words that can get you in so much trouble.

They sure did for me...20 yrs. worth. . And yet, fool I may be but I still believe...

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
well, apparently there are different say sos when a human being is a human being.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

The most fundamental difference is that a fetus is totally dependent on a woman's body to survive. Anti-choicers might argue that born human beings can be entirely dependent on other people too, but the crucial difference is that they are not dependent on one, specific person to the exclusion of all others. Anybody can take care of a newborn infant (or disabled person), but only that pregnant woman can nurture her fetus. She can’t hire someone else to do it.

Another key difference is that a fetus doesn't just depend on a woman's body for survival, it actually resides inside her body. Human beings must, by definition, be separate individuals. They do not gain the status of human being by virtue of living inside the body of another human being—the very thought is inherently ridiculous, even offensive.

Thats a great "pro-choice" argument, Lucy. And speaks to the difference between "unborn" and "born" but not to "human being" vs. "going to be human being but not til we say so".

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

On second thought:
"I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception."

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania
The good professor is an M.D.

Got a link to the good doctor?