|
7 months ago ::
Nov 09, 2011 - 11:27PM
#67
|
|
|
Good news; the common sense of the majority of Mississipians won out, and the ridiculous notion that a clump of cells is a "person" roundly defeated by voters. With goodwill to all the People- Hatman
Tks Hatman for posting this info. I was going to do that last night but I wanted to be sure of the election results and then RKen moved the thread to this board.
Didn't get a chance to post until now but you beat me to it.
Tks again.
MSara
Bnet Co-Host
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 09, 2011 - 5:48AM
#66
|
|
|
Good news; the common sense of the majority of Mississipians won out, and the ridiculous notion that a clump of cells is a "person" roundly defeated by voters.
With goodwill to all the People-
Hatman
"History records that the moneychangers have used every form of abuse, deceit, intrigue, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and it's issuance."
-- James Madison(1751-1836), Father of the Constitution for the USA, 4th US President
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 08, 2011 - 11:15PM
#65
|
|
|
Is it really your contention that a single diploid cell is a "child"?
As much as a collection of cells that drools and says "coo" is a person.
The former has a parasitic relationship with a separate self-contained living human being. The latter is an independent being in need of nurturing from an independent human being.
Yes, both are dependent on others for life.
Huh?
Not really. A woman is not "dependant on others for life." More of that Sexist fevered imagination stuff. And highly insulting towards women as fully formed and living individal human beings. But very typical of a certain "religious" mindset that is hellbent on imposing ITS beliefs onto ALL women.
Um… Fodaoson and I were referring to a diploid and an infant. When I said both are dependent on others for life, I was referring to the diploid and the infant, not the woman.
------- Nice rant based on your faulty reading… Yikes.
Well Jonny--now you won't even try to say a woman is dependent because you know EXACTLY what I am going to say.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 08, 2011 - 11:10PM
#64
|
|
|
This thread was moved from US News & Politics
Conservative, Libertarian, Life member of the NRA and VFW
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 08, 2011 - 11:04PM
#63
|
|
|
TENAC ssays-- "You can't win this argument." WGAL replies-- There is NO "argument." There are scientific observable reproducible FACTS. "Religious" ideas about single cells cannot "win" anything. This "One Celled Person" initiative is an UNscientific Sexist ANTI-Women campaign.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 08, 2011 - 11:00PM
#62
|
|
|
Is it really your contention that a single diploid cell is a "child"?
As much as a collection of cells that drools and says "coo" is a person.
The former has a parasitic relationship with a separate self-contained living human being. The latter is an independent being in need of nurturing from an independent human being.
Yes, both are dependent on others for life.
Huh?
Not really. A woman is not "dependant on others for life."
More of that Sexist fevered imagination stuff.
And highly insulting towards women as fully formed and living individal human beings.
But very typical of a certain "religious" mindset that is hellbent on imposing ITS beliefs onto ALL women.
Um… Fodaoson and I were referring to a diploid and an infant. When I said both are dependent on others for life, I was referring to the diploid and the infant, not the woman.
------- Nice rant based on your faulty reading… Yikes.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 08, 2011 - 10:58PM
#61
|
|
|
Is it really your contention that a single diploid cell is a "child"?
As much as a collection of cells that drools and says "coo" is a person.
That's unscientific and NOT factual. A single diploid cell is NOT comparable to BILLIONS of cells specialzed into types that are organized into tissues that are organized into organs that are organized into systems-- all of which specialization takes at least SEVEN MONTHS to occur. ONE cell s NOT a person no matter how much anyone might wish it to be. It's NOT faactual. It's NOT scientific. And it's NOT biblical. That it miht be any of those is a figment of some very fevered imaginations.
Thats bogus. You are full of crap.
Show me the citiation.
No--I'm full of SCIENTIFIC FACTS.
Sorry--but that is what happens over a period of seven+ months.
No matter how many "religous" ideas try to say otherwise.
What happens when an egg goes unfertilized? What happens when sperm cannot find an egg to fertilize? Then what happens when they meet and fertilize? How quickly can you tell you have a human? You cannot win this argument.
Any man can count the seeds in an apple....
.......but only God can count the apples in the seeds.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 08, 2011 - 10:51PM
#60
|
|
|
Is it really your contention that a single diploid cell is a "child"?
As much as a collection of cells that drools and says "coo" is a person.
That's unscientific and NOT factual.
A single diploid cell is NOT comparable to BILLIONS of cells specialzed into types that are organized into tissues that are organized into organs that are organized into systems--
all of which specialization takes at least SEVEN MONTHS to occur.
ONE cell s NOT a person no matter how much anyone might wish it to be.
It's NOT faactual.
It's NOT scientific.
And it's NOT biblical.
That it miht be any of those is a figment of some very fevered imaginations.
Thats bogus. You are full of crap.
Show me the citiation.
No--I'm full of SCIENTIFIC FACTS.
Sorry--but that is what happens over a period of seven+ months.
No matter how many "religous" ideas try to say otherwise.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 08, 2011 - 10:48PM
#59
|
|
|
Is it really your contention that a single diploid cell is a "child"?
As much as a collection of cells that drools and says "coo" is a person.
That's unscientific and NOT factual.
A single ilpind ceel is NIT comparable to BILLIONS of cells specialzed into tyopes that oare organized into tissues that are oganized into organs that are organized into ssmtes--
all of which scpecialization takes at least SEVEN MONTHS to occur.
ONE cell s NOT a person no matter how much anyone might wish it to be.
It's NOT faactual.
It's NOT scientific.
And it's NOT biblical.
That it miht be any of those is a figment of some very fevered imaginations.
Thats bogus. You are full of crap. Show me the citiation.
Any man can count the seeds in an apple....
.......but only God can count the apples in the seeds.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 08, 2011 - 10:47PM
#58
|
|
|
Is it really your contention that a single diploid cell is a "child"?
As much as a collection of cells that drools and says "coo" is a person.
The former has a parasitic relationship with a separate self-contained living human being. The latter is an independent being in need of nurturing from an independent human being.
Yes, both are dependent on others for life.
Huh?
Not really. A woman is not "dependant on others for life." More of that Sexist fevered imagination stuff. And highly insulting towards women as fully formed and living individal human beings. But very typical of a certain "religious" mindset that is hellbent on imposing ITS beliefs onto ALL women.
|
|
|
