katie tully
ashleey luvs roosters
Yeah. It's not a baby. It's a fetus.
Why? It's not a baby, it's a foetus, and in this respect it's appropriate to discard it along with excised organs and the like.Nebuchanezzar said:The idea of a baby being thrown out with the rest of the medical waste is absolutely repulsive.
No, you seem to be mistaken. You see it is an underdeveloped baby.Kwayera said:Why? It's not a baby, it's a foetus, and in this respect it's appropriate to discard it along with excised organs and the like.
Want me to draw you a picture?Nebuchanezzar said:No, you seem to be mistaken. You see it is an underdeveloped baby.
EDIT: Conscienceless women are using new words to excuse their murder lulz
ScienceNebuchanezzar said:No, you seem to be mistaken. You see it is an underdeveloped baby.
EDIT: Conscienceless women are using new words to excuse their murder lulz
katie tully said:
lol actually it's a chickenKwayera said:D'aww, the appearance (and sentience) of a tadpole!
LOL NEVER HERD DAT WUN BEFORE NEBZ U IZ SUCH A FUNNY GUYZNebuchanezzar said:So where do you think the dividing line lies, katie?
EDIT: You should have aborted your baby. HAHAHAHAHAHA. :rofl:
Yes. How dare one who usually slides towards the left side of things actually recognise the deficiencies of the pro-abortion point of view. how dare he evaluate the evidence and form an opinion based on that! how dare he challenge the almost untouchable status that women are developing in relation to this topic. how dare he challenge a womans right to murder!black_kat_meow said:Nebuchanezzar puts me off going to Usyd...
Yeah man you got me there. What something looks like is the issue.katie tully said:i knew these tards wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a chicken embryo and a human embryo
a) It is not the right of a parent to kill their child. I thought that Australia had progressed beyond infanticide. Apparently not?ASNSWR127 said:This is an extremely personal decision and I find it extremely hard to find ANY parent (or would be parent) that would terminate their child AT ANY TIME without a good reason. If you can do it or see no problem than it is the choice of the parent. There are two things that should never be legislated agaisnt that is aboprtion and euthanasia.
No, you're the stupid cunt. You don't find any deficiencies in our argument. Instead you spend the majority of your time playing semantics "LOLZ IZ IT A FOETUS OR A BABY" and other bullshit.Yes. How dare one who usually slides towards the left side of things actually recognise the deficiencies of the pro-abortion point of view. how dare he evaluate the evidence and form an opinion based on that! how dare he challenge the almost untouchable status that women are developing in relation to this topic. how dare he challenge a womans right to murder!
stupid cunt
Hahaha. Awful. At the very least you could have come up with an actual reason rather than drawing the arbitrary line in the dirt. How about 17 weeks? Is that ok? Why/why not? Because you say so huh?katie tully said:Nothing is "special" about 18 weeks, but I tend to think if there is going to be a cut off, it should be then.
This is an admirable sentiment imo. But it sets a dangerous precedent (much like abortion in general but nm that). Why exactly are we permitted to intervene and kill a human life if there's a guarantee that it will die later, or be in pain? Once again, where do we draw the non-arbitrary line in terms of that?Thus I don't support abortions this late unless there is substantial proof to suggest the foetus will die anyway, or will not live long after birth (or whatever circumstances surround the defect).
Semantics? No. Coming up with concrete boundaries on a life/death issue? Yes.No, you're the stupid cunt. You don't find any deficiencies in our argument. Instead you spend the majority of your time playing semantics "LOLZ IZ IT A FOETUS OR A BABY" and other bullshit.
You ought to not confuse UAI with a point of view, "champ".Nebuchanezzar said:a) It is not the right of a parent to kill their child. I thought that Australia had progressed beyond infanticide. Apparently not?
b) There are no good reasons for killing an innocent human life.
You ought to start aiming lower than 65, champ.