[quote=My Winter Storm;470362] The womans right to control her body far outweighs the right of a non sentient fetus.

In the US and AU as well I suspect, a human being's right to live outweighs any right that any other human being may invoke so long as the first human being does not represent an imminent threat to the second human being's life.



Have you noticed that you are caging your defense in a different manner now. Legally this and legally that. Do you believe that a thing actually becomes a different thing simply because the law says it is a different thing? When our law said that blacks were not human beings, do you believe that they were something other than human beings in reality, or simply legally?

Here are two straight foreward yes or no questions. Were blacks something other than human beings when our law said that they were not human and do you believe that the law can make an unborn human being something other than a human being simply by saying it is not human?

[quote=My Winter Storm;470362] Bottom line is this: Laws can, and often do, change. Abortion will always be legal, like it or not.

Not here. You may not have been following the issue here, but our supreme court is decidedly conservative these days and is actually more concerned with what the constitution says than upholding an unconstitutional agenda. They have already banned partial birth abortion (somehing that most pro choicers would have said would never happen a few years ago) and have invited states to make laws that further restrict abortion which will trigger lawsuits which will give the court means to further restrict abortion. Abortion on demand is very soon to dissappear in the US.

I have already done it. Being a human being is a matter of kind, and not degree. An infant isn't like me but it is still a human being. It has been a human being from the time it is concieved. I have provide ample credible science to support my position and I have noted that anything even resembling credible science is noticably absent from your argument. I have provided materials to support my position. If such materials exist to support yours, I have never found them and clearly you haven't either.

[quote=My Winter Storm;470362] A fetus does not have the right to health insurance - show me one fetus who has health insurance?

Are you arguing that the ability to get health insurance is what makes you a human being? Does that mean that people who have pre existing conditions and are uninsurable are not human beings?

In the US, and AU as well I would wager, the right of non citizens is protected by the same laws as those that protect the right of citizens to live. Citizens enjoy certain rights and priviledges that non citizens don't, but the right to live isn't dependent upon citizenship.

And you keep saying potential life, but have not provided even a whit of credible science to support your statement while I and others have provided a mountain of credible science that says that we are living human beings from the time we are concieved. To deny credible science when you can't even produce a single bit that contradicts what has been presented is the act of a flat earther. Is that what you are?

You are a flat earther aren't you? So your contention is that blacks were, in reality, not human beings but were instead biologically and genetically some lower species and when the law was changed, their genetics and biology altered and they became human beings? Is that really what you are saying?

If we dig up the bones of a slave who died a slave his or her DNA will not be human. Is that really what you are saying? Tell me because if it is, then this is an insight to pro choice thinking that I have never had.

[quote=My Winter Storm;470362] I am an existing human being, because I am concious and sentient. I can think and feel, and I can work and live independantly. A fetus cannot.

Of course it can't. It is immature. Newborns don't become self aware until sometime between 12 and 18 months and it will be years before they can become independent. Then there are those who, because of handicapps, will never be able to live without some form of life support. They are all still human beings. Independence and autonomy are not what make you a human being.

Again, the debate isn't over what the law says. It is clear what the law says. The debate is over whether the law is just.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

"As far as your logical fallicy shit - shove it. I am a woman."...naturemomma

You are denying credible scienice in favor of the stories you tell yourself. That makes you a flat earther.

flat-earth·er - ˈflætˈɜrθər - noun - One who stubbornly adheres to outmoded or discredited ideas.

And are you arguing that someone must have a life like me or you in order to be a human being? If you can prove that we aren't human beings from the time we are concieved, why do you continue to hold to the false belief? I can tell you why. Because your postion becomes much more difficult to justify if you argue in honest terms.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

"As far as your logical fallicy shit - shove it. I am a woman."...naturemomma

There was a time when it was just common sense not to bathe because it caused sickness. It was common sense that the earth was flat. It was common sense that blacks weren't human beings. All sorts of common sense has fallen to what we now know to be fact. Either you can defend your position that unborns are not living human beings or you can't.

By now, it is clear that you can't and your faith simply doesn't stand up to what is known to be scientific fact.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

"As far as your logical fallicy shit - shove it. I am a woman."...naturemomma

[quote=My Winter Storm;470638] Many people break the law in their own homes, I am sure - and they are yet to be caught.

Are you arguing that they will never be caught, or that it is fine if they break the law so long as they do it in private?

Again, the debate isn't over whether abortion is presently legal, the debate is over whether the laws that allow it are just. A parrot can say it is legal over and over.



You believe it, but you have not even moved the slightest distance towards proving that it is just. A belief that is not based on truth is nothing more than faith.

In order to prove that laws allowing a woman to kill her child, without legal consequence for any or no reason are just, you are going to have to prove that the child is not a human being since none of us has the right to kill someone else for reasons other than self defense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by My Winter Storm A question, Pale: Are you also against the death penalty? Those people on death row are human beings, you know...

No I am not. Those who are sentenced for capital crimes and are put to death have had the full benefit of due process. Our constitution "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Everyone who is facing execution has had due process. If each and every unborn were given due process before it is killed, then you would not hear a peep from me on the subject of abortion. My quarrell with abortion is the same as was had with slavery. Human beings are being denied their most basic human rights without due process.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

"As far as your logical fallicy shit - shove it. I am a woman."...naturemomma

Nope, over here, a woman can have an abortion if her physical or mental health would be affected should she continue with the pregnancy.
Legally, abortion is a crime in my State - but Parliment is preparing to change the law and decriminalise abortion, making it completely legal.

I believe what the law says to be fact, whether I happen to agree with it or not. I don't agree with the death penalty, but I would never say it is murder. The fact it is legal means it cannot be murder.

And this leads us to another question: If murder is the deliberate taking of another human beings life, what does that make the death penalty? By your logic, it must also be murder, despite the law saying otherwise.

Yes. If the law ruled back then that they were not human, the law was correct in it's ruling.

Yes, I do.

You would rather see abortion banned than see a woman having control of her own body and reproductive system?

A fetus is nothing like you, though. You cannot argue they are the same when the two are vastly different.

Of course not, but I will argue that only born children are issued with birth certificates - why is that, do you wonder?

Non citizens are protected, but those citizens must have been born first. The law here provides no protection over unborn children if that child is killed by someone other than the mother. We don't have fetal homocide laws here, although I wish we did.

Can you be sure that fetus will actually be born? How can you be sure that fetus will not be stillborn, or end up a miscarriage? This is why it is only potential life, and there is no way to tell whether it will survive the birth.

I never said they were not human beings, I said that when the law ruled this way, the law, at the time, was correct.

Of course it will be human DNA, I never said it wouldn't be. But because the law ruled that blacks were not people, legally, they were not.

No, but being separate from your mothers bodily nutrients does.

Is the law just when it comes to abortion? I believe so.
Is the law just when it comes to the death penalty, though?

__________________
No More Fate And No More Mystery Even As Time Falls Away I Live My Days Every Moment And Its Memory Not Only To Survive, To Die Alive.

Sorry, human, and human being are scientific terms. They are used to describe any member of genus homo species sapiens subspecies sapiens in exactly the same manner as the word horse is used to descibe members of genus equus specis caballus. Horse is no more a legal term than human is. The words are used to describe specific things.

Take a look back through the references I provided from all manner of medical shool textbooks. The term human being and human were used repeatedly. My degree is in the biological sciences and I can tell you that if you read any amount of biological texts, common names are used heavily. The reading becomes very dry if you read 500 pages of homo this and sapiens that and gallus gallus (chicken) that. Scientific names are used when necesary to separate one sub species from another, but in the interest of readability, common names are used whenever possible even in books used for post graduate education.


As to what is and isn't a human being, the science books are the only ones qualified to make the description. When a new species is found in the rain forest, do you believe it is brought to lawyers for them to determine what it is? Of course not. It is brought to science because only science is qualifed to make the determination.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

"As far as your logical fallicy shit - shove it. I am a woman."...naturemomma

[quote=My Winter Storm;470663] Nope, over here, a woman can have an abortion if her physical or mental health would be affected should she continue with the pregnancy.
Legally, abortion is a crime in my State - but Parliment is preparing to change the law and decriminalise abortion, making it completely legal.

Again, you are dodging. If you kill a citizen or a non citizen alike, you will be charged for criminal homocide no matter what they were doing so long as they didn't represent an imminent threat your life or the life of someone close to you. Whatever right you might claim will not exonerate you from killing them unless they were threatening your life.

And here, you reveal your basic dishonesty in this debate. You claim that you bellieve that whatever the law says is correct and yet, you clearly believe that the law in your state that makes abortion illegal is unjust and incorrect. You are clearly hypocritical in this manner.



Again. If we dig up the bones of a slave who died a slave in the US at a time when the law said that blacks were not human beings, do you believe that a DNA test on his remains would show that genetically, he was not a human being?

If you believe what the law says as a matter of faith and that the law is always right as a matter of faith, then I do feel a bit sorry for you.

And the death penalty isn't murder because the one being executed has been given his constitutional and legal right to trial and appeal after appeal. Murder is defined as one human being killing another human being with intent. Murder has nothing to do with the workings of due process.

Quote:

Originally Posted by My Winter Storm And this leads us to another question: If murder is the deliberate taking of another human beings life, what does that make the death penalty? By your logic, it must also be murder, despite the law saying otherwise.

Again, murder is defined as one human being (individual) killing another human being (individual) with intent. That is, one individual is denying the other individual his constitutional right to not be denied his life without due process.

Once more, do you believe that if we dug up the bones of a slave who died a slave, that a DNA test on is remains would determine that he was, in reality, something other than a human being?

Your argument has failed because you know as well as I that his DNA is going to tell us that he or she was just as human as you and I and that the law made a terrible mistake in saying that he or she was not a human being and therefore had no rights.

Yes, I do.

Then you are far less intelligent than I gave you credit for. Are you saying that you actually believe that if we do a DNA test on an unborn child that its DNA will reveal that it is something other than a human being because the law has decreed that it is something other than a human being?

I would rather see that all human beings have their basic human rights protected. A nation that denies the most basic human right to a particular group diminishes itself.

Being like me is not what makes someone else a human being. You can keep denying the truth as long as you like but it doesn't change the fact. Either you can prove that an unborn is not a living human being or you can't. We both know that you can't so your opinion is nothing more and nothing less than the rantings of a flat earther. You have no credibility in this matter because you deny science and have nothing but your own faith as argument.

Because a birth certificate tells in what country you were born, and on what date so that a record of your age may be kept so that you are not denied rights that are based on aquiring a certain age. Having a birth certificate is not a prerequisite for being a human being. The majority of the people on earth have no birth certificates and yet, they are human beings.

Again, your thinking shows a remarkable lack of depth.

Again, you dodge. The issue isn't over whether abortion is legal, but whether the laws that make it legal are just.

There is a distinct and undeniable difference between dying a natural death and being deliberately killed. Following your logic, you should be able to kill anyone for anything and simply claim that there is no proof that the one you killed would even have lived for another minute so therefore it was fine for you to kill them.

Your arguments are becoming weaker as we go.

If they were human beings and the law said that they were not human beings, then by definition the law was not correct. Describe the logic that leads you to believe that if the law says a human being is a non human that it is correct.

Is the law that makes abortion illegal in your state correct? And if it is correct, why do you support changing it to a state of incorrectness? Let me guess, it it is correct now, changing it can only result in it being incorrect except that after it is changed it will then be correct. Do you see no problem with that line of logic?

The law said that they were not human beings. The legal definition of person is "a human being" or a particular sort of corporation but no one is arguing that either unborns or blacks are coproprations.

Prove it. Prove that being separated from your mother is what makes you a human being or admit that it is nothing more than an article of faith for you.


If one gets the due process that is promised in both of our constitutions, then it is just. Unborns, however, are being denied their right to live without due process and therefore each and every one of them that is killed is killed unjustly.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

"As far as your logical fallicy shit - shove it. I am a woman."...naturemomma

You can insult my position all you choose. That doesn't change the fact that women can't be forced to gestate fetuses. Women aren't livestock. Women's bodies don't belong to the courts. They have a right to choose.

__________________
"No matter where you go, there you are."

Your postion deserves to be insulted because you are unable to defend it. As to making abortion on demand illegal, maybe you should take some time to look at the cases presently working their way through the lower courts and the present conservative majority of the supreme court before you suggest that roe will never be overturned. Partial birth abortion has already been banned and 4 years ago, any pro choicer would have said with all confidence that it never would happen.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

"As far as your logical fallicy shit - shove it. I am a woman."...naturemomma

A zygote is not yet a product, it is not completed. A product is "something produced", and a zygote is not yet produced. It is in the process of becoming a product. You are correct that word games cannot make a thing into something other than it is, and no matter how hard you try, no matter what words you use, the differences between unborn and born remain.