Nutty old bat Marg Somerville raves on about darling little embryos
Lefty
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Destroying+life+science/1719495/story.html
Choice tidbits;
"We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human
embryos for stem cell research."
As one blogger put it, we're all pre-corpses, too. That's an
irrelevant, naked appeal to sloppy sentiment that has no place in any
debate. I cannot believe this feeble-minded bint is actually allowed
to teach her version of ethics to vulnerable young minds.
It would appear she'd rather many sentient human beings die from
diseases that this research could cure than one sensless, brainless,
embryonic stem cell die, all because of some silly feelings she has
about embryos. Apparently, born, sentient humans don't tug at her
heart strings, thus it's not unethical to deny them life-saving
research.
"Ethics" based on feelings are not ethics at all.
More;
"I recognize that embryos are not babies, but they are the earliest
form of human life, with the innate potential to develop through the
full human life span. Human embryo stem cell research kills embryos
and destroys that potential."
Who gives a damn? It's not unethical to kill ~potential~, it's
unethical to kill a person. The reason for that isn't about sentient,
but practicality. It's illegal to murder a person because allowing it
would create chaos in society. What demonstrable harm to society can
killing embryos cause? She makes reference to it causing the
devaluation of human life, but provides no evidence that it would do
so. Why would it? If people don't consider an embryo the same as a
human life, they won't see any devaluation. The notion of life having
value is a social construct which exists only in the minds of people.
Therefore, it can only be devalued in the minds of people and the
devaluation is only harmful psychologically, if people allow it to be.
Again, it's all about feelings to Marg. Basically, her theory boils
down to; "If we allow embryos to be killed, people might lose their
sentimental attachment to anything that contains human DNA, which they
feel regardless of whether it is sentient or not."
This is actually an argument in favour of stem cell research. Anything
that helps people throw away useless, destructive emotions will
advance social harmony. I am not, however, convinced that humans ~do~
have such an attachment to embryos. In fact, I think most people do
not have those feelings. Some merely pretend to, like Marg, in the
service of a religious rightist political agenda, and that is
despicable.
"There are three views:
- Embryos have no moral status, they're just a "bunch of cells," and
there should be no restrictions on using them.
- They have moral status, but not yet the same status as the rest of
us -- they're only potential human life. Some restrictions are
justified, but they may be used in ways the rest of us must not, for
instance, intentionally killed in research or to make therapeutic
products.
- They are the earliest stage of each human life and deserve the same
respect as the rest of us, they are human life with potential."
Number one is the only rational view.
This one is a real howler;
"There is a long-established, widely shared, deep moral intuition that
human embryos are not just things or just cells like any other cell as
some argue, and we breach that moral intuition at our ethical peril."
Only a moron wants legal decisions to be based on intuition (aka
irrational beliefs), not reason and pragmatism.
Extremist pro-lifers are all, without exception, both mentally
unbalanced and painfully stupid.
IAAH
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Jun 22, 3:47 pm, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> The latest rant by the deranged "ethicist";
>>
>>
>> Choice tidbits;
>>
>> "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
>> conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human
>> embryos for stem cell research."
>>
>> As one blogger put it, we're all pre-corpses, too. That's an
>> irrelevant, naked appeal to sloppy sentiment that has no place in any
>> debate.
>
> character has no place in any debate.
Yes, yes, we all know that it's usual for the anti-abortion
crowd to claim that using correct technical terms is somehow
out of bounds.
You make that claim because reality is not your friend.
--
When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called
insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is
called Religion.
- Robert Pirsig
Lefty
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Jun 22, 3:47 pm, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Choice tidbits;
>
> > "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
> > conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human
> > embryos for stem cell research."
>
> > As one blogger put it, we're all pre-corpses, too. That's an
> > irrelevant, naked appeal to sloppy sentiment that has no place in any
> > debate.
>
Strawman noted.
Who said anything about a fetus? An embryo isn't a fetus. It's the pre-
fetal stage of life, You don't even have one clue about the basic
facts, obviously.
Here you go, shit for brains;
"Embryo: The organism in the early stages of growth and
differentiation from fertilization to, in humans, the beginning of the
third month of pregnancy. After that point in time, it is termed a
fetus."
http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=3225
> >I cannot believe this feeble-minded bint is actually allowed
>
> > to teach her version of ethics to vulnerable young minds.
>
> If she is feeble minded, you have the iq of an amoeba.
No refutation, just insult. Point to me.
> > It would appear she'd rather many sentient human beings die from
> > diseases that this research could cure than one sensless, brainless,
> > embryonic stem cell die, all because of some silly feelings she has
> > about embryos.
>
> ROFLMAO. Stem cells can now be created, we don't need to kill unborn
> children to treat diseases.
This is why;
"However, the research has raised concerns among scientists and lobby
groups. Josephine Quintavalle, of Comment on Reproductive Ethics,
said: "We still don't know the dangers of taking a biopsy from an
early stage embryo, whether it has any effect on the baby's future
development. On paper it looks like an ethical solution, but that
requires the biopsy to be completely harmless."
Robin Lovell-Badge, a stem cell expert at the National Institute for
Medical Research in London, said that while the work was important, it
was inefficient and unlikely to lead to plentiful stocks of embryonic
stem cells. "It requires couples having IVF to give permission to have
cells taken from their embryos and it's extremely unlikely a couple
would want to do that," he said.
Ian Wilmut, whose team at Edinburgh University is hoping to use stem
cells to unravel the mysteries of motor neurone disease, warned people
not to seize on the new technique as the only way to create stem
cells. "It would be very unfortunate if this became seen as the only
route to derive human embryonic stem cells. We still need more and we
need more research on how to derive them," he said."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2006/aug/24/stemcells.genetics
You're so stupid you didn't even know the cells are created from live
embryos, often embryos parents plan on gestating to term? If embryos
are so precious, how do you justify removing cells that might be
important to the health of the future child?
You vile hypocrite. You don't give a rat's ass about born children.
>
> >Apparently, born, sentient humans don't tug at her
> > heart strings, thus it's not unethical to deny them life-saving
> > research.
>
> Apparently, you are too stupid to keep up with the latest scientific
> developments. Not surprising, given that you have the iq of an amoeba.
Apparently, you must be talking about yourself, since you didn't know
how the cells were created.
> > "Ethics" based on feelings are not ethics at all.
>
> On what else do you base ethics, Einstein?
Reason and pragmatism. That's what rational people do. I know you're
unfamiliar with both, but try to imagine how smart, sane people think
so you can understand. Strain that brain cell.
> > More;
>
> > "I recognize that embryos are not babies, but they are the earliest
> > form of human life, with the innate potential to develop through the
> > full human life span. Human embryo stem cell research kills embryos
> > and destroys that potential."
> > Who gives a damn? It's not unethical to kill ~potential~, it's
> > unethical to kill a person.
>
> Why do you feel this?
I don't "feel" it. it's a philosophy, based on what I said about
demonstrable social harm. A true philosophy is cerebral, not
emotional. Emotionally, I feel abortion is icky. That's nothing to
base a philosophical belief on and only idiots do. It's like all those
assholes who want to prevent gays from marrying just because gay sex
grosses them out. Selfish, irresponsible morons want to enact laws to
stop people from doing things they dislike, just to make themselves
feel better. Decent people want to enact laws for the benefit of
social harmony, justice, and order, regardless of personal feelings.
Therefore, you are a piss-poor excuse for a human being, you self-
centred turd.
> >The reason for that isn't about sentient,
> > but practicality. It's illegal to murder a person because allowing it
> > would create chaos in society. What demonstrable harm to society can
> > killing embryos cause?
>
> It encourages disrespect for, and devalues all human life, you
> dumbass baby-killer wannabe.
No refutation or answer to the question, only reiteration of false
claim and insult. Point to me.
Explain how it does so or shut your hole. Feel free to insult me if
you've made an actual argument, but don't try to substitute an insult
for one, coward.
> >She makes reference to it causing the
> > devaluation of human life, but provides no evidence that it would do
> > so. Why would it?
>
> Because you are in essence saying that an unborn human has no right to
> life or security of person.On what basis do you distinguish this
> unborn human from a born human so as to deprive it of these rights?
Finally, you made a point. Congratulations. I am indeed saying exactly
that, within gestational limits.
I'll bold it for you so you can't miss it again- the basis is
SENTIENCE. Only a thinking, feeling life form can be harmed. A non-
sentient life cannot experience harm. It can't experience anything.
Non-sentient life forms do not need human rights. They can't benefit
from them or suffer from their lack until their cerebral cortex is
developed at around 26 weeks. Harm is a ~perception~.
> >If people don't consider an embryo the same as a
> > human life, they won't see any devaluation.
>
> If someone doesn't see you baby-killer wannabes as human life, they
> won't see any devaluation when some asshole off's you. Great logic
> there buddy.
Except I'm sentient, and I therefore need and have rights. Your
analogy fails miserably.
> >The notion of life having
> > value is a social construct which exists only in the minds of people.
>
> Check and mate asshole.
Nonsensical babble. What are you trying to say?
> <remaining abortion nutter nonsense snipped>
>
> Craig is that you?
Chilton? You actually think Chilton could write a coherent post? Too
funny.
Lefty
> Voyager wrote:
> > x-no-archive: yes
>
> > On Jun 22, 3:47 pm, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> >> The latest rant by the deranged "ethicist";
>
> >>http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Destroying+life+science/17194...
>
> >> Choice tidbits;
>
> >> "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
> >> conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human
> >> embryos for stem cell research."
>
> >> As one blogger put it, we're all pre-corpses, too. That's an
> >> irrelevant, naked appeal to sloppy sentiment that has no place in any
> >> debate.
>
> > Actually, calling an unborn human a fetus to deny its essential human
> > character has no place in any debate.
>
> Yes, yes, we all know that it's usual for the anti-abortion
> crowd to claim that using correct technical terms is somehow
> out of bounds.
>
> You make that claim because reality is not your friend.
They're all crazy. I'm convinced of it.
Lefty
Oh, and BTW, since you have childishly changed the subject title, back
atcha, you child-hating, woman-hating, Talibanesque knuckle-dragger.
IAAH
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Jun 22, 4:35 pm, IAAH <n...@email.exist> wrote:
>> Voyager wrote:
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>> On Jun 22, 3:47 pm, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>>> The latest rant by the deranged "ethicist";
>>>> http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Destroying+life+science/17194...
>>>> Choice tidbits;
>>>> "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
>>>> conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human
>>>> embryos for stem cell research."
>>>> As one blogger put it, we're all pre-corpses, too. That's an
>>>> irrelevant, naked appeal to sloppy sentiment that has no place in any
>>>> debate.
>>> Actually, calling an unborn human a fetus to deny its essential human
>>> character has no place in any debate.
>> Yes, yes, we all know that it's usual for the anti-abortion
>> crowd to claim that using correct technical terms is somehow
>> out of bounds.
>>
>> You make that claim because reality is not your friend.
>
> deny science to deny that a unique human life begins at conception.
>
It's quite amusing, to see that you think that science is on
your side and yet you decry the correct use of proper terms.
You should know that denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
harry.maxtor.von.stien
"IAAH" <n...@email.exist> wrote in message
news:_t2dnXHqFtyKmt3X...@giganews.com...
> Voyager wrote:
> > x-no-archive: yes
> >
> > On Jun 22, 3:47 pm, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> >> The latest rant by the deranged "ethicist";
> >>
> >>
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Destroying+life+science/17194...
> >>
> >> Choice tidbits;
> >>
> >> "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
> >> conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human
> >> embryos for stem cell research."
> >>
> >> As one blogger put it, we're all pre-corpses, too. That's an
> >> irrelevant, naked appeal to sloppy sentiment that has no place in any
> >> debate.
> >
> > Actually, calling an unborn human a fetus to deny its essential human
> > character has no place in any debate.
>
> Yes, yes, we all know that it's usual for the anti-abortion
> crowd to claim that using correct technical terms is somehow
> out of bounds.
>
> You make that claim because reality is not your friend.
What is it with you death cult kooks, as anything with a spark in it, you
all seem to go off the deep end and have to put out it's flame.......Have
you been over medicaed again......and need to go back into the nut house...
harry.maxtor.von.stien
"Lefty" <lefty_t...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:3cd29ef7-dd81-433e...@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
Now, now, you socialist only say that because you all are teminally ill....
harry.maxtor.von.stien
"IAAH" <n...@email.exist> wrote in message
How do you feel about paper abortions, nimrod....
harry.maxtor.von.stien
>Who said anything about a fetus? An embryo isn't a fetus. It's the
pre-fetal stage of life,
Interesting, so now you beleive you are some kind of god that can and will
snuff out anything that doesn't fit into your socilaist death cult....go
take you med's kook...your fucking baby killers and child molesters..
harry.maxtor.von.stien
Give it a rest, your nutty feminist dildo.....sinse when did you think you
have any rights to kill whatever you choose you freak of nature.
Sunny Malone
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
Since courts in Canada and the US have categorically stated that an
embryo is not a human being, I'd say the Supreme Court gives us that
right. Answer your question, fundie boy?
Lefty
>
>
>
> > > x-no-archive: yes
>
> > > On Jun 22, 3:47 pm, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > >> The latest rant by the deranged "ethicist";
>
> > >>http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Destroying+life+science/17194...
>
> > >> Choice tidbits;
>
> > >> "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
> > >> conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human
> > >> embryos for stem cell research."
>
> > >> As one blogger put it, we're all pre-corpses, too. That's an
> > >> irrelevant, naked appeal to sloppy sentiment that has no place in any
> > >> debate.
>
> > > Actually, calling an unborn human a fetus to deny its essential human
> > > character has no place in any debate.
>
> > Yes, yes, we all know that it's usual for the anti-abortion
> > crowd to claim that using correct technical terms is somehow
> > out of bounds.
>
> > You make that claim because reality is not your friend.
>
> deny science to deny that a unique human life begins at conception.
That is laughable. The science says that a fetus is not sentient, you
lying sack of shit.
Read and learn;
http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/uk_professor_says_fetus_cant_feel_pain/
"A clinical review, published in the April 15th issue of the British
Medical Journal, claims that unborn fetuses don’t have the synaptic
receptors to feel any pain that would be induced during an abortion.
Stuart Derbyshire, a senior psychologist at the University of
Birmingham in the UK, argues that unborn fetuses up to 26 weeks old
cannot feel pain, and that, even after 26 weeks, when their cortex is
fully developed, fetuses do not have a mind sophisticated enough to
process the experience of pain."
Lefty
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
You mean ~terminally~ ill? So "socialists" say that because they are
all going to die from an illness? How does that make any sense?
What an illiterate ape. You don't even know what terminally means.
You are dismissed as a sub-moronic fungus.
pnyikos
I don't suppose you are the same Lefty who posted to talk.abortion in
1992-93, are you? He was quite a character--you'd think you were
reading alt.flame to see his posts ripping into this or that person.
> On Jun 22, 6:11 pm, Voyager <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > x-no-archive: yes
>
> > On Jun 22, 3:47 pm, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> > > The latest rant by the deranged "ethicist";
>
> > >http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Destroying+life+science/17194...
>
> > > Choice tidbits;
>
> > > "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
> > > conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human
> > > embryos for stem cell research."
>
> > > As one blogger put it, we're all pre-corpses, too. That's an
> > > irrelevant, naked appeal to sloppy sentiment that has no place in any
> > > debate.
Actually, it's a purely factual statement until we get to the "clear"
part and then it is a naked matter of opinion, unless one is speaking
to an audience which assumes the human intividual to be sacred from
the moment of fertilization.
> > Actually, calling an unborn human a fetus to deny its essential human
> > character has no place in any debate.
>
> Strawman noted.
> Who said anything about a fetus? An embryo isn't a fetus. It's the pre-
> fetal stage of life, You don't even have one clue about the basic
> facts, obviously.
Nor do most pro-choicers, who use the word "fetus" for anything that
has implanted in the endometrium. I think most of them also
inaccurately use the word "ovum" for everything from the penetrated
oocyte to the pre-implantation blastocyst.
> Here you go, shit for brains;
Hmmm... maybe you ARE the same old Lefty. :-)
> http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=3225
Imagine my surprise, when I clicked on pregnancy, not to be sent to a
definition of pregnancy, but to a page from which another click took
me to a page where I saw the following:
"By the end of the first trimester, your baby is about three inches
long and weighs about half an ounce. The eyes move closer together
into their positions, and the ears also are in position. The liver is
making bile, and the kidneys are secreting urine into the bladder.
Even though you can't feel your baby move yet, your baby will move
inside you in response to pushing on your abdomen."
http://www.medicinenet.com/pregnancy/page2.htm#1j
Why, that's an even stronger use of "baby" at this early stage than
what I saw in the Medline Encyclopedia. And all these years, abortion-
rights fanatics have been accusing pro-lifers of lying or, at best,
ignorance when they call a fetus an unborn baby.
> > > It would appear she'd rather many sentient human beings die from
> > > diseases that this research could cure than one sensless, brainless,
> > > embryonic stem cell die,
Are YOU sure you'd rather have embryonic stem cells be funded to the
tune of 3 billion in 10 years in California alone, and a whole lot
more under Obama's stimulus/healthcare giveaway, than see the same
sentient human beings be saved by adult stem cells that do not have
all the drawbacks of embryonic stem cells?
You know, don't you, that there is no guarantee that embryonic stem
cells will cure even one patient of anything in the next ten years?
Meanwhile, adult stem cells cure people by the thousands of all kinds
of diseases, but government money for further research on them is
drying up over Congress and state legislatures jumping on the
politically motivated embryonic stem cell bandwagon.
> > ROFLMAO. Stem cells can now be created, we don't need to kill unborn
> > children to treat diseases.
>
> This is why;
>
> "However, the research has raised concerns among scientists and lobby
> groups. Josephine Quintavalle, of Comment on Reproductive Ethics,
> said: "We still don't know the dangers of taking a biopsy from an
> early stage embryo, whether it has any effect on the baby's future
> development.
There's that word baby again. More importantly, it seems hypocritical
to worry about such things when the alternative kills the early stage
embryo outright.
> > >She makes reference to it causing the
> > > devaluation of human life, but provides no evidence that it would do
> > > so. Why would it?
>
> > Because you are in essence saying that an unborn human has no right to
> > life or security of person.On what basis do you distinguish this
> > unborn human from a born human so as to deprive it of these rights?
>
> Finally, you made a point. Congratulations. I am indeed saying exactly
> that, within gestational limits.
> I'll bold it for you so you can't miss it again- the basis is
> SENTIENCE.
If sentience means anything more to you than being past the state of
complete oblivion, I have a bone to pick with you.
Even if it means nothing more, I still have a bone to pick with you,
because you seem to be under the delusion that we know that a cerebral
cortex is essential for a fetus to be in anything other than a state
of complete oblivion.
I think there is a very good case for ALL normal fetuses (as distinct
from embryos) to have progressed beyond that stage.
[...]
> > Check and mate asshole.
>
> Nonsensical babble. What are you trying to say?
I dunno, but "Spartakus" loves to declare victory in similar ways.
And if you don't know who Spartakus is, you must be from a non-
abortion newsgroup.
> > <remaining abortion nutter nonsense snipped>
>
> > Craig is that you?
>
> Chilton? You actually think Chilton could write a coherent post? Too
> funny.
Oh, he can be coherent--it's just that he doesn't know the difference
between an opinion of which he is fond, and fact. For instance, he
"knows" there is no such thing as an unborn baby, and he "knows" he
knows better than the MedlinePlus Encyclopedia and MedicineNet.com.
Peter Nyikos
Lefty
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
Nope, I don't decide whether an embryo lives or dies, freak. The
people involved and affected decide. That's ~people~, meaning sentient
life forms with human rights. You see, ~I~ don't impose my beliefs on
others, unlike you.
Stop buggering your nephews and pick the corn out of your teeth, you
hillbilly POS. You haven't made a single argument against my position
and you aren't capable of it. You can't even write a grammatically
correct post, you ignorant fuck.
pnyikos
> Voyager wrote:
> > x-no-archive: yes
>
> > On Jun 22, 4:35 pm, IAAH <n...@email.exist> wrote:
> >> Voyager wrote:
> >>> x-no-archive: yes
> >>> On Jun 22, 3:47 pm, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> >>>> The latest rant by the deranged "ethicist";
> >>>>http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Destroying+life+science/17194...
> >>>> Choice tidbits;
> >>>> "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
> >>>> conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human
> >>>> embryos for stem cell research."
> >>>> As one blogger put it, we're all pre-corpses, too. That's an
> >>>> irrelevant, naked appeal to sloppy sentiment that has no place in any
> >>>> debate.
> >>> Actually, calling an unborn human a fetus to deny its essential human
> >>> character has no place in any debate.
> >> Yes, yes, we all know that it's usual for the anti-abortion
> >> crowd to claim that using correct technical terms is somehow
> >> out of bounds.
And we also know that it's usual for the abortion rights crowd to
claim that using correct terms like "unborn child" and "unborn baby"
is out of bounds. The playing field is level--or would be if the
abortion rights crowd didn't play "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no
evil" to massive campaigns of slander by the group I call the Seven
Musketeers against anyone who poses a threat to their hammerlock on
alt.abortion and (especially) talk.abortion.
These are: "elizabeth", Fischer, Gwen, Hekhuis, Humphrey, Keegan and
"Spartakus".
> >> You make that claim because reality is not your friend.
>
> > Reality and science are on our side. You baby-killer wannabees have to
> > deny science to deny that a unique human life begins at conception.
>
> It's quite amusing, to see that you think that science is on
> your side and yet you decry the correct use of proper terms.
Semantics is such a fruitless thing to get hung up about. I fault
both pro-lifers and pro-choicers for the undue emphasis on it.
Peter Nyikos
the_pc_jellllybean!!.!!!!
"Voyager" <think...@dlcwest.com> wrote in message
news:20ab5618-17d2-4843...@g1g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> x-no-archive: yes
What is it to you what anyone does with their own bodies, douchebag?
Get the fuck out of people's lives, you hypocritical sack of shit.
Lefty
Why do you have the right to kill bacteria by washing, fuckface?
Oh, that's right. You don't wash.
Explain why a brainless, senseless embryo needs the right to live or
shut your yammering flapper. Explain how it can be harmed.
Can't do it? Then cram an enema up your reeking humhole and release
the shit you're full of.
Lefty
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Jun 22, 6:53 pm, Sunny Malone <sunnymal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> makes you Talibanesque and Hitleresque.
You ignorant fool, the Taliban and the Nazis outlawed abortion. Under
the Taliban, women couldn't have careers, much less have abortions in
order to pursue them. That's exactly the kind of society ~you~ want.
Now stick your head back up your fetid anus, say howdy to your brain,
and waddle away to cloud-cuckoo land.
pnyikos
> On Jun 22, 8:12 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
>
> 296670.glb.na> wrote:
> > "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> >news:f03a7b13-da71-4446...@a36g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> > On Jun 22, 6:11 pm, Voyager <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
> > <snip drivel>
>
> > Oh, and BTW, since you have childishly changed the subject title, back
> > atcha, you child-hating, woman-hating, Talibanesque knuckle-dragger.
>
> > Give it a rest, your nutty feminist dildo.....sinse when did you think you
> > have any rights to kill whatever you choose you freak of nature.
>
> Since courts in Canada and the US have categorically stated that an
> embryo is not a human being,
The courts in the USA have said nothing of the sort. You are
confusing being a human being with legal personhood (and even then you
aren't right about the USA).
> I'd say the Supreme Court gives us that
> right.
Yes, but not for the reason you give. Not even personhood, in the
USA, since most states have NOT said anything one way or the other
about whether the fetus is a person, and neither has the US Supreme
Court. It used liberty of the woman to trump the life of even viable
unborn babies in most situations. Is it the same in Canada?
Maybe the Declaration of Independence should have reversed the order
between "life" and "liberty" among the unalienable rights, eh? :-\
Peter Nyikos
IAAH
Okay, the whole 'Musketeers' thing is starting to sound like
a paranoia problem, and the difference between using
developmentally correct terms and 'unborn baby' is that only
one of those is driven by an attempt at emotionalism.
>
>>>> You make that claim because reality is not your friend.
>>> Reality and science are on our side. You baby-killer wannabees have to
>>> deny science to deny that a unique human life begins at conception.
>> It's quite amusing, to see that you think that science is on
>> your side and yet you decry the correct use of proper terms.
>
> Semantics is such a fruitless thing to get hung up about. I fault
> both pro-lifers and pro-choicers for the undue emphasis on it.
Semantics is an important component of discussions about
rights or any argument of this sort. To dismiss an argument
as 'semantics' in this kind of case weakens your case a lot.
>
> Peter Nyikos
Lefty
> On Jun 22, 7:18 pm, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> I don't suppose you are the same Lefty who posted to talk.abortion in
> 1992-93, are you? He was quite a character--you'd think you were
> reading alt.flame to see his posts ripping into this or that person.
Sorry, not me. But he sounds like fun.
>
> > On Jun 22, 6:11 pm, Voyager <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
>
> > > x-no-archive: yes
>
> > > On Jun 22, 3:47 pm, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> > > > The latest rant by the deranged "ethicist";
>
> > > >http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Destroying+life+science/17194...
>
> > > > Choice tidbits;
>
> > > > "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
> > > > conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human
> > > > embryos for stem cell research."
>
> > > > As one blogger put it, we're all pre-corpses, too. That's an
> > > > irrelevant, naked appeal to sloppy sentiment that has no place in any
> > > > debate.
>
> Actually, it's a purely factual statement until we get to the "clear"
> part and then it is a naked matter of opinion, unless one is speaking
> to an audience which assumes the human intividual to be sacred from
> the moment of fertilization.
The intent of stating that fact is to influence emotion. It's not
relevant to her argument.
> > > Actually, calling an unborn human a fetus to deny its essential human
> > > character has no place in any debate.
>
> > Strawman noted.
> > Who said anything about a fetus? An embryo isn't a fetus. It's the pre-
> > fetal stage of life, You don't even have one clue about the basic
> > facts, obviously.
>
> Nor do most pro-choicers, who use the word "fetus" for anything that
> has implanted in the endometrium. I think most of them also
> inaccurately use the word "ovum" for everything from the penetrated
> oocyte to the pre-implantation blastocyst.
I'm not one to fuss about semantics, but the distinction between a
fetus and an embryo is an important one because a fetus, at a later
stage, has at least the possibility of sentience. An embryo doesn't.
> > Here you go, shit for brains;
>
> Hmmm... maybe you ARE the same old Lefty. :-)
>
> >http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=3225
>
> Imagine my surprise, when I clicked on pregnancy, not to be sent to a
> definition of pregnancy, but to a page from which another click took
> me to a page where I saw the following:
>
> "By the end of the first trimester, your baby is about three inches
> long and weighs about half an ounce. The eyes move closer together
> into their positions, and the ears also are in position. The liver is
> making bile, and the kidneys are secreting urine into the bladder.
> Even though you can't feel your baby move yet, your baby will move
> inside you in response to pushing on your abdomen."http://www.medicinenet.com/pregnancy/page2.htm#1j
>
> Why, that's an even stronger use of "baby" at this early stage than
> what I saw in the Medline Encyclopedia. And all these years, abortion-
> rights fanatics have been accusing pro-lifers of lying or, at best,
> ignorance when they call a fetus an unborn baby.
As I said, I'm not into semantic arguments. I don't care about anyone
using the term "unborn baby". I've used it myself. It means nothing as
far as the issue is concerned. The question is not whether it's a
baby, but whether it has enough awareness to experience physical
sensation, emotion and to form rudimentary thought, which qualifies it
as a person. Some children are born without awareness (brain dead),
and it is legal to terminate them. That's still a baby, but not a
person.
> > > > It would appear she'd rather many sentient human beings die from
> > > > diseases that this research could cure than one sensless, brainless,
> > > > embryonic stem cell die,
>
> Are YOU sure you'd rather have embryonic stem cells be funded to the
> tune of 3 billion in 10 years in California alone, and a whole lot
> more under Obama's stimulus/healthcare giveaway, than see the same
> sentient human beings be saved by adult stem cells that do not have
> all the drawbacks of embryonic stem cells?
If it were possible to use only adult stem cells, fine. It's not. Info
here;
http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics5.asp
> You know, don't you, that there is no guarantee that embryonic stem
> cells will cure even one patient of anything in the next ten years?
Of course there's no guarantee. Every time a new treatment is being
researched, there's no guarantee. That's hardly an argument against
doing said research.
> Meanwhile, adult stem cells cure people by the thousands of all kinds
> of diseases, but government money for further research on them is
> drying up over Congress and state legislatures jumping on the
> politically motivated embryonic stem cell bandwagon.
Can you provide a cite for this claim? It's interesting, but again
it's not an argument against embryonic stem cell research.
> > > ROFLMAO. Stem cells can now be created, we don't need to kill unborn
> > > children to treat diseases.
>
> > This is why;
>
> > "However, the research has raised concerns among scientists and lobby
> > groups. Josephine Quintavalle, of Comment on Reproductive Ethics,
> > said: "We still don't know the dangers of taking a biopsy from an
> > early stage embryo, whether it has any effect on the baby's future
> > development.
>
> There's that word baby again. More importantly, it seems hypocritical
> to worry about such things when the alternative kills the early stage
> embryo outright.
Not in the least. An embryo isn't sentient. A born child can be
harmed. An embryo can't. Why can't you get that important distinction?
> > > >She makes reference to it causing the
> > > > devaluation of human life, but provides no evidence that it would do
> > > > so. Why would it?
>
> > > Because you are in essence saying that an unborn human has no right to
> > > life or security of person.On what basis do you distinguish this
> > > unborn human from a born human so as to deprive it of these rights?
>
> > Finally, you made a point. Congratulations. I am indeed saying exactly
> > that, within gestational limits.
> > I'll bold it for you so you can't miss it again- the basis is
> > SENTIENCE.
>
> If sentience means anything more to you than being past the state of
> complete oblivion, I have a bone to pick with you.
Sentience means awareness- the state of being capable of emotions,
thoughts, and perceptions. To be a person, one must have enough
awareness to be capable of the above.
> Even if it means nothing more, I still have a bone to pick with you,
> because you seem to be under the delusion that we know that a cerebral
> cortex is essential for a fetus to be in anything other than a state
> of complete oblivion.
I'll post this link again;
http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/uk_professor_says_fetus_cant_feel_pain/
More;
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/315/7116/1111/c
Apparently, medical science is, collectively under the same
"delusion", since it's well established that the cc is the seat of
human awareness and the lack of its function does indeed create a
state of oblivion.
> I think there is a very good case for ALL normal fetuses (as distinct
> from embryos) to have progressed beyond that stage.
Feel free to make that case.
> > > Check and mate asshole.
>
> > Nonsensical babble. What are you trying to say?
>
> I dunno, but "Spartakus" loves to declare victory in similar ways.
> And if you don't know who Spartakus is, you must be from a non-
> abortion newsgroup.
I've probably seen Spartakus before, but have ignored him. So he was
crowing about an imaginary victory? Pathetic.
> > > <remaining abortion nutter nonsense snipped>
>
> > > Craig is that you?
>
> > Chilton? You actually think Chilton could write a coherent post? Too
> > funny.
>
> Oh, he can be coherent--it's just that he doesn't know the difference
> between an opinion of which he is fond, and fact. For instance, he
> "knows" there is no such thing as an unborn baby, and he "knows" he
> knows better than the MedlinePlus Encyclopedia and MedicineNet.com.
I find his posts almost impossible to read, so I don't usually bother.
You obviously know him better than I do.
The Chief Instigator
>x-no-archive: yes
>I don't think science is on my side. I am on the side of science.
>Science establishes that a unique human life begins at conception, and
>all the lies and stories you baby killer wannabes tell doesn't alter
>that fact one iota.
>> You should know that denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
>You abortionists demonstrate this daily.
Only in your chemically enhanced dreams, kid...my wife's only pregnancy was
aborted by the birth of her daughter. We're heading up to see her in a few
weeks, along with her younger son.
--
Patrick L. "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2008-09 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Manitoba 3, Houston 1 (May 25: Moose advance, 4-2)
NEXT GAME: The 2009-10 opener in October, TBA
IAAH
> x-no-archive: yes
No, you're really not.
Science doesn't rely on being pissy, and you really do.
Besides, you wrote just up there that you think science is
on your side, which raises questions about what YOU consider
to be science - it certainly isn't what the scientific
method establishes.
the_pc_jellllybean!!.!!!!
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Jun 23, 1:54 pm, <tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!!>
> wrote:
>> "Voyager" <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote in message
That is not the issue here, you dopey cunt.
The issue is assholes like you deciding they can dictate to others what they
do with their own bodies.
You hypocrticial assholes dont want "big gubbmint" intervening in your
lives, but of course that doesn't count when you religious fuckwits get all
high and mighty in deciding what's best for others. Fucking hypocrities.
Tell you what peabrain, when you get pregnant you can decide what to do with
your own body, till then stay the fuck out of it.
Sound like a deal?
>> Get the fuck out of people's lives, you hypocritical sack of shit.
>
> I've never aborted my unborn child.
You're a walking advertisement for abortion on demand, you stupid
hypocritical cunt.
harry.maxtor.von.stien
It makes all kinds of sense, but you socilaist types must keep your heads
buried in the sand at all times...
>What an illiterate ape.
Ahhh, so you think your a darwin dreaming chimp. How cute...
>You don't even know what terminally means.
Really, wow.....how long have you been terminally ill in the speical
olimpic's. I would support assisted suicide for people who are terminally
ill like you socialists...
>You are dismissed as a sub-moronic fungus.
Maybe you should clean your socialist feet more often and your problem might
go away..
harry.maxtor.von.stien
On Jun 22, 8:11 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:5e5e1d89-d783-4393...@s12g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> >Who said anything about a fetus? An embryo isn't a fetus. It's the
>
> pre-fetal stage of life,
>
> Interesting, so now you beleive you are some kind of god that can and will
> snuff out anything that doesn't fit into your socilaist death cult....go
> take you med's kook...your fucking baby killers and child molesters..
>Nope, I don't decide whether an embryo lives or dies, freak. The
>>life forms with human rights.
Human rights was created by a bunch of cult like socilaists, who feel the
need to push their verstion of the spiecal olimpic's
But Yesterday your story was based on the animated cult version of how baby
killing saved your live and has become your logo.... you must have serious
seizures
>buggering your nephews and pick the corn out of your teeth,
\Is that how you back woods hicks got all your socilaists babies..
harry.maxtor.von.stien
"Sunny Malone" <sunny...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:00aff2a9-00d8-4cf8...@m19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
Oh goodie, so you admit your a murdering piece of trashy scum....well at
least you have come forth to say so...
harry.maxtor.von.stien
<tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!!> wrote in message
news:2tm5ij....@news.alt.net...
Oh so you admit your story of killing a little spark of life was only the
animated version to you having seizures in reality......
>
> Get the fuck out of people's lives, you hypocritical sack of shit.
Yes, just say no to killing babies or that spark of life you hate so much...
>
>
harry.maxtor.von.stien
<tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!!> wrote in message
news:2tmjfj....@news.alt.net...
IF these weird sex cults like yours took the time not to get layed by every
dick that come forth, then you wouldn't have the problem in the first
place...and your own bodies would be pure...
harry.maxtor.von.stien
On Jun 22, 8:12 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:f03a7b13-da71-4446...@a36g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 22, 6:11 pm, Voyager <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
> <snip drivel>
>
> Oh, and BTW, since you have childishly changed the subject title, back
> atcha, you child-hating, woman-hating, Talibanesque knuckle-dragger.
>
> Give it a rest, your nutty feminist dildo.....sinse when did you think you
> have any rights to kill whatever you choose you freak of nature.
>Why do you have the right to kill bacteria by washing, fuckface?
>.Oh, that's right. You don't wash.
Wow, your really went to the limit on this one, but did you make sure the
deadness of the baby or even part of your brain was to be refrigerated or
frozen right away, as not to let it spoil in the sun...
Lefty
Then explain. Can't? Then you're a coward and a liar. You fucked up,
used the wrong word, and won't admit it. You wanted to say "mentally
ill".
> >What an illiterate ape.
>
> Ahhh, so you think your a darwin dreaming chimp. How cute...
Nonsensical babble.
> >You don't even know what terminally means.
>
> Really, wow.....how long have you been terminally ill in the speical
> olimpic's. I would support assisted suicide for people who are terminally
> ill like you socialists...
Bwahaha! You're completely off your rocker and English is obviously
not your first language. Try a translation program.
> >You are dismissed as a sub-moronic fungus.
>
> Maybe you should clean your socialist feet more often and your problem might
> go away..
At least that one was sort of coherent.
Lefty
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:fa26269e-c736-4a9a...@a7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 22, 8:11 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
>
> 296670.glb.na> wrote:
> > "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> >news:5e5e1d89-d783-4393...@s12g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> > >Who said anything about a fetus? An embryo isn't a fetus. It's the
>
> > pre-fetal stage of life,
>
> > Interesting, so now you beleive you are some kind of god that can and will
> > snuff out anything that doesn't fit into your socilaist death cult....go
> > take you med's kook...your fucking baby killers and child molesters..
> >Nope, I don't decide whether an embryo lives or dies, freak. The
> >>life forms with human rights.
>
> Human rights was created by a bunch of cult like socilaists, who feel the
> need to push their verstion of the spiecal olimpic's
Again with this illiterate drivel. Are you German? Learn to post
coherent English if you want to be understood.
> But Yesterday your story was based on the animated cult version of how baby
> killing saved your live and has become your logo.... you must have serious
> seizures
Keep it up. Your English usage errors are highly amusing.
> >buggering your nephews and pick the corn out of your teeth,
>
> \Is that how you back woods hicks got all your socilaists babies..
I apologize for thinking you a hillbilly. You're actually a neo-Nazi.
Now you'll cry that I've insulted Germans, right?
Lefty
> wrote:
>
>
>
> else's body, douchebag.
Not a ~person's~ body. Only people have the right to bodily autonomy.
Brainless, senseless life forms don't.
> > Get the fuck out of people's lives, you hypocritical sack of shit.
>
> I've never aborted my unborn child.
Nah, you just support maiming born children by removing their cells
when they are in the embryonic stage to create new cells. Typical pro-
life hypocrisy. You hate children and worship embryos.
Lefty
Projection.
> > The issue is assholes like you deciding they can dictate to others what they
> > do with their own bodies.
>
> No, that isn't the issue... that is your misdirection and
> mischaracterization of the issue.
Bullshit. That's exactly what it's about. You don't care about
children and you proved it.
>The simple truth you lying, death
> cult assholes can't get around is that a unique human life begins at
> conception.
Who cares? It's not a thinking, feeling person.
What does it take to get that through your thick skull?
> > You hypocrticial assholes dont want "big gubbmint" intervening in your
> > lives, but of course that doesn't count when you religious fuckwits
>
> I don't want big government intervening in my life unless it is to
> provide a national medicare system and public health and education
> systems, and an offset to oligopoly corporations that will
> redistribute wealth in our society so no one has to suffer from
> poverty. And I am not religious, asshole.
>
> >get all
> > high and mighty in deciding what's best for others. Fucking hypocrities.
>
> Says someone who thinks it is ok to kill unborn humans.
In other words, a sane person.
> > Tell you what peabrain, when you get pregnant you can decide what to do with
> > your own body, till then stay the fuck out of it.
>
> My partner and daughters can get pregnant. They are opposed to
> abortion too fuckwit.
Then they shouldn't have abortions. They don't have any right to foist
their stupid beliefs on others through law.
> > Sound like a deal?
>
> No fuckwit, it does not.
> Why do you hate women so much?
When did you stop beating your wife?
> > >> Get the fuck out of people's lives, you hypocritical sack of shit.
>
> > > I've never aborted my unborn child.
> > You're a walking advertisement for abortion on demand, you stupid
> > hypocritical cunt.
>
> There is that female hate on again. What's wrong with you anyway?
You've just revealed you're not female, shitwit, and if you were, the
poster wouldn't hate you for that, but because you're an asshole.
Or are you one of those politically correct types who thinks the very
use of the word "cunt" is misogynistic?
Blow it out your ass, ya fat daft cunt.
Lefty
>
>
>
> > On Jun 22, 10:25 pm, Voyager <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
>
> > > x-no-archive: yes
>
> > > On Jun 22, 6:53 pm, Sunny Malone <sunnymal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 22, 8:12 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
>
> > > > 296670.glb.na> wrote:
> > > > > "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> > > > >news:f03a7b13-da71-4446...@a36g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> > > > > On Jun 22, 6:11 pm, Voyager <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
> > > > > <snip drivel>
>
> > > > > Oh, and BTW, since you have childishly changed the subject title, back
> > > > > atcha, you child-hating, woman-hating, Talibanesque knuckle-dragger.
>
> > > > > Give it a rest, your nutty feminist dildo.....sinse when did you think you
> > > > > have any rights to kill whatever you choose you freak of nature.
>
> > > > Since courts in Canada and the US have categorically stated that an
> > > > embryo is not a human being, I'd say the Supreme Court gives us that
> > > > right. Answer your question, fundie boy?
>
> > > You killed your own unborn child so you could "pursue careers." That
> > > makes you Talibanesque and Hitleresque.
>
> > You ignorant fool, the Taliban and the Nazis outlawed abortion.
>
Glad to help. This comes from a pro-life site, so I know you'll
believe it;
"While being freed from repressive Taliban rule, Afghanistan has also
been afflicted with one of the horrors of its liberators - abortion.
Agence France Presse reports today that abortion up to the third month
of pregnancy is now legal in Afghanistan, while under the Taliban from
1996-2001 abortions were banned."
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2002/jan/02011502.html
> What they and sunny have in common is that they deny the humanity of
> the humans they seek to kill.
As do pro-lifers who support the killing of abortion doctors and
enslaving and ruining the lives of women by forcing them to gestate.
> >Under
> > the Taliban, women couldn't have careers, much less have abortions in
> > order to pursue them. That's exactly the kind of society ~you~ want.
>
> There are about 6 million fewer baby girls annually in China, India,
> South Asia, and Africa, than there should be if normal birth patterns
> were followed. Parents are engaging in sex selective abortions and
> infanticide to kill unborn baby killers and born baby girls in order
> that they can have sons and avoid dowry payments and the like.
That's directly related to the low status of females in those areas,
something you are very familiar with, being a creep who hates and
wants to enslave women.
> You baby killer wannabes legitimate this practice with your denial of
> the humanity of the unborn human.
You think the Chinese and the Indians give a shit what Western pro-
choicers think?
Get a grip.
> Why do you hate women and unborn baby girls? Why do you legitimate
> their execution?
Why do you orally pleasure your uncle? Why do you goose-step down city
streets in a Nazi armband, leather chaps, and a thong whilst singing
the Georgia Tech fight song in a high, squeaky voice?
Don't you know what begging the question is, you logically challenged,
dishonest pile of guano.
> > Now stick your head back up your fetid anus, say howdy to your brain,
> > and waddle away to cloud-cuckoo land.
>
> Says someone who has never had their head out of their fetid anus.
You can't even come up with your own insults, but simply regurgitate
mine. You're a joke.
Lefty
>
>
>
> > On Jun 22, 8:12 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
>
> > 296670.glb.na> wrote:
> > > "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> > >news:f03a7b13-da71-4446...@a36g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> > > On Jun 22, 6:11 pm, Voyager <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
> > > <snip drivel>
>
> > > Oh, and BTW, since you have childishly changed the subject title, back
> > > atcha, you child-hating, woman-hating, Talibanesque knuckle-dragger.
>
> > > Give it a rest, your nutty feminist dildo.....sinse when did you think you
> > > have any rights to kill whatever you choose you freak of nature.
>
>
> > shut your yammering flapper.
>
> Because if it doesn't have the right to life, deathcult assholes like
> you will kill it.
So? It can't even experience its own death.
> >Explain how it can be harmed.
>
> By salt solution, suction, the morning after pill.
How is that harm, if it can't feel the pain or fear?
Lefty
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:f0feeb18-631e-4bb6...@g1g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 22, 8:12 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
>
> 296670.glb.na> wrote:
> > "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> >news:f03a7b13-da71-4446...@a36g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> > On Jun 22, 6:11 pm, Voyager <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
> > <snip drivel>
>
> > Oh, and BTW, since you have childishly changed the subject title, back
> > atcha, you child-hating, woman-hating, Talibanesque knuckle-dragger.
>
> > Give it a rest, your nutty feminist dildo.....sinse when did you think you
> > have any rights to kill whatever you choose you freak of nature.
> >Why do you have the right to kill bacteria by washing, fuckface?
> >.Oh, that's right. You don't wash.
>
> Wow, your really went to the limit on this one, but did you make sure the
> deadness of the baby or even part of your brain was to be refrigerated or
> frozen right away, as not to let it spoil in the sun...
No on point response, as usual. Just Teutonic gibberish.
harry.maxtor.von.stien
Wow you really are getting bent out of shape, No dimwit you socilaist types
are terminally ill in the head with your thinking process.....
> >What an illiterate ape.
>
> Ahhh, so you think your a darwin dreaming chimp. How cute...
>Nonsensical babble.
Is it, or you just a drooling dimwit, who didn'r understand what IS BEING
SAID..........IT'S LIKE SAYING your homosexuality is a way of helping your
brothers and sisters to raise more children so you can group together in a
class of your own...If so why don't you publish your own paper and show us
all how they are wrong. ... but first, choose one that you think is most
suitable. .... Also, it doesn't come from 'Darwinism', since Darwin didn't
create it..
> >You don't even know what terminally means.
>
> Really, wow.....how long have you been terminally ill in the speical
> olimpic's. I would support assisted suicide for people who are terminally
> ill like you socialists...
>Bwahaha! You're completely off your rocker and English is obviously
>not your first language. Try a translation program.
Oh please if your going to pretend your so kind of scienitic chimpness,
I'll crown you kong...
harry.maxtor.von.stien
On Jun 23, 2:07 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:fa26269e-c736-4a9a...@a7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 22, 8:11 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
>
> 296670.glb.na> wrote:
> > "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> >news:5e5e1d89-d783-4393...@s12g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> > >Who said anything about a fetus? An embryo isn't a fetus. It's the
>
> > pre-fetal stage of life,
>
> > Interesting, so now you beleive you are some kind of god that can and
will
> > snuff out anything that doesn't fit into your socilaist death cult....go
> > take you med's kook...your fucking baby killers and child molesters..
> >Nope, I don't decide whether an embryo lives or dies, freak. The
> >>life forms with human rights.
>
> Human rights was created by a bunch of cult like socilaists, who feel the
> need to push their verstion of the spiecal olimpic's
>Again with this illiterate drivel. Are you German? Learn to post
>coherent English if you want to be understood.
Oh please Herr Chimpate, ifisnt youist canist graspist, then go soke you
head for a while will you.
> But Yesterday your story was based on the animated cult version of how
baby
> killing saved your live and has become your logo.... you must have serious
> seizures
>Keep it up. Your English usage errors are highly amusing.
Yes you are...very funny...not....
> >buggering your nephews and pick the corn out of your teeth,
>
> \Is that how you back woods hicks got all your socilaists babies..
>I apologize for thinking you a hillbilly. You're actually a neo-Nazi.
Really, is there a pleage I can take too, that neo-nazi's have, or do I go
though some kind of cult like speech and sound like Hilter himself and
pleage to keep children safe from the likes of your kind......
>Now you'll cry that I've insulted Germans, right?
What is wrong with your head, are you also a Racist baby killer too, because
you hate white niggers and black chinks.
harry.maxtor.von.stien
>.How is that harm, if it can't feel the pain or fear?
Gee, I heard a feminazi say that once but got all buggered up when she had
to tell the truth instead of dreaming about things that never were..
harry.maxtor.von.stien
Oh some on admit your in a cult...
The Chief Instigator
>x-no-archive: yes
>On Jun 22, 9:51 pm, The Chief Instigator <patr...@io.com> wrote:
>Only in your chemically enhanced dreams, kid. Your wife's pregnancy
>culminated with the birth of her daughter.
No problem, as she's been pro-choice about as long as I've been, and her
choice has resulted in her daughter's three pregnancies, which is how she's
a grandmother of three.
>>We're heading up to see her in a few weeks, along with her younger son.
>Have a safe trip.
That will depend on the usual clueless wonders along the ~1800-kilometer
haul up that way. I suspect we'll get a few pictures, and after the return
trip, I'll have to figure out which ones deserve webspace.
the_pc_jellllybean!!.!!!!
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Jun 23, 5:40 pm, <tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!!>
No.
>Why do you abortionists hate women?
Why do you beat your wife?
>> The issue is assholes like you deciding they can dictate to others what
>> they
>> do with their own bodies.
>
> No, that isn't the issue
Of course it is, shithead.
Your saying "it ain't!" three times isn't going to change that.
>... that is your misdirection and
> mischaracterization of the issue. The simple truth you lying, death
> cult assholes can't get around is that a unique human life begins at
> conception.
I'm guessing yours began when your mom got raped in the ass and a few days
later shat you out.
>
>
>> You hypocrticial assholes dont want "big gubbmint" intervening in your
>> lives, but of course that doesn't count when you religious fuckwits
>
> I don't want big government intervening in my life unless
So you adimt you *do* want it intervening.
Make up your mind, shithead.
> it is to
> provide a national medicare system and public health and education
> systems, and an offset to oligopoly corporations that will
> redistribute wealth in our society so no one has to suffer from
> poverty. And I am not religious, asshole.
>
>
>>get all
>> high and mighty in deciding what's best for others. Fucking hypocrities.
>
> Says someone who thinks it is ok to kill unborn humans.
LOL! Oh stop it, you'll make me cry!!
>
>> Tell you what peabrain, when you get pregnant you can decide what to do
>> with
>> your own body, till then stay the fuck out of it.
>
> My partner and daughters can get pregnant.
Good. Just make sure you ain't the daddy.
>They are opposed to
> abortion too fuckwit.
So what, snapperhead?
>> Sound like a deal?
>
> No fuckwit, it does not.
> Why do you hate women so much?
ROFLOL!
>
>> >> Get the fuck out of people's lives, you hypocritical sack of shit.
>>
>> > I've never aborted my unborn child.
>
>> You're a walking advertisement for abortion on demand, you stupid
>> hypocritical cunt.
>
> There is that female hate on again.
Where is that female hate, cunt?
All I see is disdain for a hypocritcal sack of shit like you.
> What's wrong with you anyway?
Absolutely nothing.
And you?
the_pc_jellllybean!!.!!!!
"harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..296670.glb.na> wrote in message
news:OW80m.33327$PH1.17916@edtnps82...
Once more, in English this time, loon.
Duncan Patton a Campbell
> The latest rant by the deranged "ethicist";
>
> http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Destroying+life+science/1719495/story.html
>
> Choice tidbits;
>
> "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
> conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human embryos
> for stem cell research."
>
We are all ex-dinosaur droppings too, if you want to get technical
about it.
But that's not what this is about. The private medical industry
is terrified of publicly funded research "beating them to the punch"
over stem-cell technology like what happened with penicillin and
insulin.
This Maggie Somerville is nothing more than a (possibly unwitting)
shill for some powerful private interests who want to prevent
public funding for stem cell research in order to forestall
competition to their own ongoing efforts.
Dhu
--
Duncan Patton a Campbell is Dhu
Duncan Patton a Campbell
The reason for this "fear" by private interest is that the public
interest can often command superhuman efforts by the most brilliant
minds available: witness the Manhattan project or Bletchley Park.
Under such circumstances private interests are often hamstrung
by more than a mere lack of talent: Heisenberg's rendition
of Hamlet has got to be one of the more imaginative portrayals
of the Prince's deepest uncertainties about the morality of Power.
Lefty
Clue for you, Adolf- ~nobody~ understands what you're saying, and
nobody wants to.
Your only value in any discussion is in providing derisive amusement,
but sadly, it has a short shelf life. I have begun to grow bored and
will soon have no more patience for you. Alas, you may no longer be
able to bask in the warm glow of my attention.
> > >You don't even know what terminally means.
>
> > Really, wow.....how long have you been terminally ill in the speical
> > olimpic's. I would support assisted suicide for people who are terminally
> > ill like you socialists...
> >Bwahaha! You're completely off your rocker and English is obviously
> >not your first language. Try a translation program.
>
> Oh please if your going to pretend your so kind of scienitic chimpness,
> I'll crown you kong...
Lol. Translation programs are high science to you? I bet when you're
speaking your own language, even other Germans find your babble hard
to follow.
Lefty
Okay, that last bit was so hilarious that I suspect you are spoofing.
If so, well done.
If not, you are beyond insane.
Lefty
>
> > >Why do you abortionists hate women?
>
> > Why do you beat your wife?
>
> herring.
You hypocritical, dishonest shitstain, you know perfectly well that
was in response to you begging the question by asking a question
assuming facts not in evidence. The standard reply to that tactic is
"when did you stop beating your wife?" If you don't like it being
done to you, don't do it yourself, wife-beating thug.
<snip rest of lies and thuggery>
Lefty
No.
>
> > > > The issue is assholes like you deciding they can dictate to others what they
> > > > do with their own bodies.
>
> > > No, that isn't the issue... that is your misdirection and
> > > mischaracterization of the issue.
Reiterating a denial is not an argument. The point stands.
> > Bullshit. That's exactly what it's about. You don't care about
> > children and you proved it.
>
> Baby-killer wannabe lies.
No refutation given. No explanation of why you're willing to see born
children maimed, yet claim your motivation is that you care about
innocent life. Point stands. Your motivation is enslaving women.
> > >The simple truth you lying, death
> > > cult assholes can't get around is that a unique human life begins at
> > > conception.
> > Who cares? It's not a thinking, feeling person.
> > What does it take to get that through your thick skull?
>
> So it is your position that only humans can think and feel have a
> right to life.
Hell yeah. Do you support keeping brain dead patients alive forever?
> What of the comatose, those suffering from dementia, or mentally
> challenged folk like yourself? Is it ok for others to kill them?
You idiot, in all those cases, there is thought and feeling.
You've just insulted the disabled in a shocking, disgusting way by
claiming they are not sentient. You are evil.
> > > > You hypocrticial assholes dont want "big gubbmint" intervening in your
> > > > lives, but of course that doesn't count when you religious fuckwits
>
> > > I don't want big government intervening in my life unless it is to
> > > provide a national medicare system and public health and education
> > > systems, and an offset to oligopoly corporations that will
> > > redistribute wealth in our society so no one has to suffer from
> > > poverty. And I am not religious, asshole.
>
> > > >get all
> > > > high and mighty in deciding what's best for others. Fucking hypocrities.
>
> > > Says someone who thinks it is ok to kill unborn humans.
>
> > In other words, a sane person.
>
> IOW, a delusional death cult moron. You guys are the opposite of sane.
Same old same old. Come up with something new.
> > > > Tell you what peabrain, when you get pregnant you can decide what to do with
> > > > your own body, till then stay the fuck out of it.
>
> > > My partner and daughters can get pregnant. They are opposed to
> > > abortion too fuckwit.
> > Then they shouldn't have abortions. They don't have any right to foist
> > their stupid beliefs on others through law.
>
> Believing that a unique human life begins at conception isn't stupid,
> baby-killer wannabe, it is the only rational, logical belief one can
> have.
Strawman. I'm not saying human ~life~ does not begin at conception.
I'm saying personhood doesn't. You're too stupid to comprehend the
difference.
> > > > Sound like a deal?
>
> > > No fuckwit, it does not.
> > > Why do you hate women so much?
>
> > When did you stop beating your wife?
>
> I don't beat my wife. But you legitimate the death of 6 million unborn
> girls annually in India, China and South Asia, and thousands of girls
> and boys in America.
> Even wife beaters don't do that.
I don't care about the deaths of non-persons and neither do you. Your
motivation is 100% misogynistic.
You promote the enslavement and abuse of women, just like the wife-
beater and rapist you are.
> > > > >> Get the fuck out of people's lives, you hypocritical sack of shit.
>
> > > > > I've never aborted my unborn child.
> > > > You're a walking advertisement for abortion on demand, you stupid
> > > > hypocritical cunt.
>
> > > There is that female hate on again. What's wrong with you anyway?
> > You've just revealed you're not female, shitwit, and if you were, the
> > poster wouldn't hate you for that, but because you're an asshole.
> > Or are you one of those politically correct types who thinks the very
> > use of the word "cunt" is misogynistic?
>
> Using "hypocritical cunt" as a term of derision is misogynistic.
Why? Is "prick" also misandrist? You've never called a man a prick or
a dick? Of course you have, hypocrite.
> > Blow it out your ass, ya fat daft cunt.
>
> So is the above. Why do you hate women so much baby killer wannabe?
Why do you shoot in your shorts to snuff films and fantasize about
your own daughters?
Lefty
wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:47:46 -0700, Lefty wrote:
> > The latest rant by the deranged "ethicist";
>
>
> > Choice tidbits;
>
> > "We are all ex-embryos and are all in the process of becoming, from
> > conception to death; it's clear we can't ethically destroy human embryos
> > for stem cell research."
>
> We are all ex-dinosaur droppings too, if you want to get technical
> about it.
>
> But that's not what this is about. The private medical industry
> is terrified of publicly funded research "beating them to the punch"
> over stem-cell technology like what happened with penicillin and
> insulin.
>
> This Maggie Somerville is nothing more than a (possibly unwitting)
> shill for some powerful private interests who want to prevent
> public funding for stem cell research in order to forestall
> competition to their own ongoing efforts.
>
> Dhu
>
> --
> Duncan Patton a Campbell is Dhu
Good theory.
Lefty
>
> > > What they and sunny have in common is that they deny the humanity of
> > > the humans they seek to kill.
>
> > As do pro-lifers who support the killing of abortion doctors and
> > enslaving and ruining the lives of women by forcing them to gestate.
>
> chance to grow up and killing off entire genetic lines, not just the
> little boy or girl which is heinous enough.
So?
>No woman will be enslaved
> or have her life ruined by forcing her to gestate... in fact, the
> phrase is typical of the lies you baby-killer wannabes spew... we
> don't force her to gestate, it is a natural, biological process.
You disgusting, woman-hating, lying oinker. You dare to say that
pregnancy is not dangerous and unpleasant for women. You deserve nine
months of being sick and miserable and to die every bit as painfully
as women do in childbirth.
Pregnancy is a natural, biological process which can kill, asshole. It
also frequently causes illness, both short and long term. Of course
you're okay with forcing "natural, biological" processes which can
hurt and kill women. You get off on the idea.
> > > >Under
> > > > the Taliban, women couldn't have careers, much less have abortions in
> > > > order to pursue them. That's exactly the kind of society ~you~ want.
>
> > > There are about 6 million fewer baby girls annually in China, India,
> > > South Asia, and Africa, than there should be if normal birth patterns
> > > were followed. Parents are engaging in sex selective abortions and
> > > infanticide to kill unborn baby killers and born baby girls in order
> > > that they can have sons and avoid dowry payments and the like.
> > That's directly related to the low status of females in those areas,
> > something you are very familiar with, being a creep who hates and
> > wants to enslave women.
>
> You legitimate the murder of unborn baby girls, you lying piece of
> shit.
So? They aren't people. Only people can be murdered.
> > > You baby killer wannabes legitimate this practice with your denial of
> > > the humanity of the unborn human.
>
> > You think the Chinese and the Indians give a shit what Western pro-
> > choicers think?
> > Get a grip.
>
> Do you think news reports of our laws, and your degenerate opinions,
> have no influence?
Idiot, the Chinese news is heavily censored and most Chinese are too
poor to be on the internet. But that's a red herring, anyway. Who
cares if the Chinese abort non-persons?
> > > Why do you hate women and unborn baby girls? Why do you legitimate
> > > their execution?
>
> > Why do you orally pleasure your uncle? Why do you goose-step down city
> > streets in a Nazi armband, leather chaps, and a thong whilst singing
> > the Georgia Tech fight song in a high, squeaky voice?
> > Don't you know what begging the question is, you logically challenged,
> > dishonest pile of guano.
>
> I do, you logically challenged, dishonest pile of shit.
You copied that one from me, too.
>And what I
> asked wasn't "begging the question" in any normal sense of the term -
> the questions have their root in your sick, demented, twisted,
> deathcult beliefs, and the fact that people in China, India, South
> Asia and Africa are killing baby girls with sex selective abortion.
Idiot, begging the question is assuming the acceptance of facts not in
evidence. When you ask "why do you hate women?" you assume I accept
the premise behind your question. It's a classic logical fallacy.
> For me, this is a tragic wrong.
Because you're stupid.
>Not for you though... right woman-
> hater?
That's right, incestuous rapist.
> > > > Now stick your head back up your fetid anus, say howdy to your brain,
> > > > and waddle away to cloud-cuckoo land.
>
> > > Says someone who has never had their head out of their fetid anus.
>
> > You can't even come up with your own insults, but simply regurgitate
> > mine. You're a joke.
>
> You don't deserve better than regurgitated insults, you lying, woman
> hating, baby killer wannabe scumbucket.
Excuses, excuses. You're just unoriginal and dullwitted.
harry.maxtor.von.stien
> Is it, or you just a drooling dimwit, who didn'r understand what IS BEING
> SAID..........IT'S LIKE SAYING your homosexuality is a way of helping your
> brothers and sisters to raise more children so you can group together in a
> class of your own...If so why don't you publish your own paper and show us
> all how they are wrong. ... but first, choose one that you think is most
> suitable. .... Also, it doesn't come from 'Darwinism', since Darwin didn't
> create it..
>Clue for you, Adolf- ~nobody~ understands what you're saying, and
>nobody wants to.
>Your only value in any discussion is in providing derisive amusement,
>but sadly, it has a short shelf life. I have begun to grow bored and
>will soon have no more patience for you. Alas, you may no longer be
>able to bask in the warm glow of my attention.
LOL's....then off with you women and bow down to the master as you have not
shown your worth in my grace.
> > >You don't even know what terminally means.
>
> > Really, wow.....how long have you been terminally ill in the speical
> > olimpic's. I would support assisted suicide for people who are
terminally
> > ill like you socialists...
> >Bwahaha! You're completely off your rocker and English is obviously
> >not your first language. Try a translation program.
>
> Oh please if your going to pretend your so kind of scienitic chimpness,
> I'll crown you kong...
>Lol. Translation programs are high science to you? I bet when you're
>speaking your own language, even other Germans find your babble hard
>to follow.
What Utter nonsense you spout, as you seem to be in a class of your own. You
note woman, from where I stand, I see you seem to have plenty of incentive
in experienced by midgets standing on your shoulders wearing high heels and
fishnet stockings...... As there Ain't no mountain high enough, that I can't
climb..... :-)
harry.maxtor.von.stien
oh no! who could do such a thing.......OK.. I got caught, but it took you a
few pints to see that I suspect we have an alternadesi mole somewhere on the
Liberal writing staff....I sent it around to all my friends. I knew it would
happen, but the visual is ... I suspect the title will be "Dill Here. Drill
Now" or "Drill. Baby. Drill." ... Am I the only one who finds all this a bit
sexist? ... Question for you...Who was the last MALE politician to ever be
put in a spoof porno?
harry.maxtor.von.stien
>You disgusting, woman-hating, lying oinker.
There's obviously a Polish joke in here somewhere......It's about yes choice
only for you (or you'll be condemned by all those other feminists who hate
other women). ... take example... Fat people, who say they are happy with
their apperance are fucking lying..No what it comes down to is this...." The
message? Blame men for EVERYTHING!
>You dare to say that
>pregnancy is not dangerous and unpleasant for women. You deserve nine
>months of being sick and miserable and to die every bit as painfully
>as women do in childbirth.
>Pregnancy is a natural, biological process which can kill, asshole. It
>also frequently causes illness, both short and long term. Of course
>you're okay with forcing "natural, biological" processes which can
>hurt and kill women.
What's with all your hate mongoring towards men? You sound so anti-American,
But Gloria, so your lying about wanting sex ed when some guy "hate f*cks"
your daughter based on her political views please remember ... Maybe it is
nuts to think this sort of behavior is disgusting, when most girls that
comments here are ... and leaving "before and after" pictures of your bald
spot lying around...."I hate it when I get stuck with the Catholic route!"
Now People who hate women do - gay fashion designers, fashion editors, ...
No seriously, It's just as crazy, evil, and disgusting when we strap weapons
onto our kids, and send them off to war and for what so some feminists can
claim they worked hard to send their male children off to be killed......
harry.maxtor.von.stien
<tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!!> wrote in message
To speak more natural English, learners like you should tell a joke, but I
know you think it's all about you isn't it .... next you'll say if I get
corned beef and cabbage one more time for lunch, I'm going to jump off the
building's first floor..
Lefty
It took a while to catch onto you simply because pro-lifers are
usually so crazy that you were believable.
Re; your question, I believe John Edwards and Bill Clinton have been
spoofed for their sexual antics.
Lefty
> disregard science and reason, I think you are lying... again.
I don't even know who Klunk is, but if it pleases you to think I'm
this person, have at it.
>
> > > > > > The issue is assholes like you deciding they can dictate to others what they
> > > > > > do with their own bodies.
>
> > > > > No, that isn't the issue... that is your misdirection and
> > > > > mischaracterization of the issue.
> > Reiterating a denial is not an argument. The point stands.
>
> ROFLMAO. Because you say so. Hardly.
I'm afraid the rules of debate say so. Sucks for you.
> > > > Bullshit. That's exactly what it's about. You don't care about
> > > > children and you proved it.
>
> > > Baby-killer wannabe lies.
>
> > No refutation given. No explanation of why you're willing to see born
> > children maimed,
>
> In what way am I willing to see born children maimed?
Don't play games. We both know your stated your support of using cells
from embryos that will be carried to term in order to create new stem
cells. We both know I showed you information relating to the harm this
could cause the born child.
> >yet claim your motivation is that you care about
> > innocent life. Point stands. Your motivation is enslaving women.
>
> No it isn't. It is in saving the lives of people.
Embryos aren't people and you've been completely unable to explain why
you think they are. Point stands.
> > > > >The simple truth you lying, death
> > > > > cult assholes can't get around is that a unique human life begins at
> > > > > conception.
> > > > Who cares? It's not a thinking, feeling person.
> > > > What does it take to get that through your thick skull?
>
> > > So it is your position that only humans <that> can think and feel have a
> > > right to life.
> > Hell yeah. Do you support keeping brain dead patients alive forever?
>
> I don't support killing them.
Why not?
> > > What of the comatose, those suffering from dementia, or mentally
> > > challenged folk like yourself? Is it ok for others to kill them?
> > You idiot, in all those cases, there is thought and feeling.
>
> How do you know?
You're asking me how I know disabled people can think and feel, as if
there is any doubt? You despicable bigot. Of course you know I can
provide reams of proof. You're blowing smoke.
> > You've just insulted the disabled in a shocking, disgusting way by
> > claiming they are not sentient. You are evil.
>
> I'm not convinced you are sentient. My guess is an IQ of 90 at best.
Deflection from your bigoted hate speech against disabled people.
Coward.
> What about mammals? Do you eat them?
Yep. Unlike you, I don't falsely claim to believe all life is sacred,
so I'm allowed to eat whatever I like. Do you eat animal flesh? Do you
eat vegetables? Vegetables are non-sentient life, which you claim is
sacred. Again, you are proven a hypocrite.
> > > > > > You hypocrticial assholes dont want "big gubbmint" intervening in your
> > > > > > lives, but of course that doesn't count when you religious fuckwits
>
> > > > > I don't want big government intervening in my life unless it is to
> > > > > provide a national medicare system and public health and education
> > > > > systems, and an offset to oligopoly corporations that will
> > > > > redistribute wealth in our society so no one has to suffer from
> > > > > poverty. And I am not religious, asshole.
>
> > > > > >get all
> > > > > > high and mighty in deciding what's best for others. Fucking hypocrities.
>
> > > > > Says someone who thinks it is ok to kill unborn humans.
>
> > > > In other words, a sane person.
>
> > > IOW, a delusional death cult moron. You guys are the opposite of sane.
> > Same old same old. Come up with something new.
>
> You don't deserve new.
Limp excuse for lack of original thought.
> > > > > > Tell you what peabrain, when you get pregnant you can decide what to do with
> > > > > > your own body, till then stay the fuck out of it.
>
> > > > > My partner and daughters can get pregnant. They are opposed to
> > > > > abortion too fuckwit.
> > > > Then they shouldn't have abortions. They don't have any right to foist
> > > > their stupid beliefs on others through law.
>
> > > Believing that a unique human life begins at conception isn't stupid,
> > > baby-killer wannabe, it is the only rational, logical belief one can
> > > have.
> > Strawman. I'm not saying human ~life~ does not begin at conception.
> > I'm saying personhood doesn't. You're too stupid to comprehend the
> > difference.
>
> A unique human life begins with conception. At some point that life
> should become sentient. For me, that is enough to mean that it has a
> right not to be deprived of its life.
Yes, at around 26 weeks it is sentient. After that point, I oppose
abortion. Can you provide a reasonable argument against this position?
Nobody ever has.
> > > > > > Sound like a deal?
>
> > > > > No fuckwit, it does not.
> > > > > Why do you hate women so much?
>
> > > > When did you stop beating your wife?
>
> > > I don't beat my wife. But you legitimate the death of 6 million unborn
> > > girls annually in India, China and South Asia, and thousands of girls
> > > and boys in America.
> > > Even wife beaters don't do that.
> > I don't care about the deaths of non-persons and neither do you. Your
> > motivation is 100% misogynistic.
>
> Liar.
Is "pants on fire" next?. Geez, grow up.
> > You promote the enslavement and abuse of women,
>
> I do nothing of the sort.
Limp denial. Explain how being forced to gestate is not enslavement.
> >just like the wife-
> > beater and rapist you are.
>
> Says a woman hating baby-killer wannabe.
Is that your mantra? I know you think it's shocking, but it's boring
and unoriginal.
> > > > > > >> Get the fuck out of people's lives, you hypocritical sack of shit.
>
> > > > > > > I've never aborted my unborn child.
> > > > > > You're a walking advertisement for abortion on demand, you stupid
> > > > > > hypocritical cunt.
>
> > > > > There is that female hate on again. What's wrong with you anyway?
> > > > You've just revealed you're not female, shitwit, and if you were, the
> > > > poster wouldn't hate you for that, but because you're an asshole.
> > > > Or are you one of those politically correct types who thinks the very
> > > > use of the word "cunt" is misogynistic?
>
> > > Using "hypocritical cunt" as a term of derision is misogynistic.
> > Why? Is "prick" also misandrist?
>
> When used as a term of derision, prefaced by aother term of derision,
> "yes."
Why? It's just a word.
> >You've never called a man a prick or
> > a dick? Of course you have, hypocrite.
>
> Assumption of facts not in evidence.
More hypocrisy. You assume facts not in evidence constantly.
Answer the question or I will assume the answer is yes.
> > > > Blow it out your ass, ya fat daft cunt.
>
> > > So is the above. Why do you hate women so much baby killer wannabe?
>
> > Why do you shoot in your shorts to snuff films and fantasize about
> > your own daughters?
>
> The point of distinction between our questions is that mine is founded
> in fact but yours is not.
Prove it. Facts can be proven. It is your subjective opinion only, and
not a well-founded one in the least. I actually do think you are
probably a wife-beater, but I won't lie and claim it's a fact. Lying
is your game.
> Is it ok to abort unborn baby girls so your first/only child will be
> male or not?
I support the right to abort, for any reason, before 26 weeks. It's
deplorable that people would do it for that reason, but none of my
business and none of yours. If the woman is a silly twit who doesn't
want a girl, she'd be a bad mother to a girl anyway.
The whole Chinese abortion thing is a red herring anyway. It has
nothing to do with my stated position, which is completely
consistent.
Lefty
Expressing petty resentment about not being popular is lamer.
Lefty
>
>
>
> > On Jun 22, 8:12 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
>
> > 296670.glb.na> wrote:
> > > "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> > >news:f03a7b13-da71-4446...@a36g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> > > On Jun 22, 6:11 pm, Voyager <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
> > > <snip drivel>
>
> > > Oh, and BTW, since you have childishly changed the subject title, back
> > > atcha, you child-hating, woman-hating, Talibanesque knuckle-dragger.
>
> > > Give it a rest, your nutty feminist dildo.....sinse when did you think you
> > > have any rights to kill whatever you choose you freak of nature.
>
> > Oh, that's right. You don't wash.
>
> > Explain why a brainless, senseless embryo needs the right to live or
> > shut your yammering flapper.
>
> Because if it doesn't have the right to life, deathcult assholes like
> you will kill it.
>
> >Explain how it can be harmed.
>
> By salt solution, suction, the morning after pill.
>
BTW, you still haven't answer my question. I repeat; if it can't think
or feel, how is there harm? Harm is a perception. In absence of the
capacity for pain, sadness, or fear, it is impossible.
Failure to answer will be taken to mean that you concede there is no
harm. Point goes to me.
Lefty
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:08639e45-4676-4063...@f32g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Is it, or you just a drooling dimwit, who didn'r understand what IS BEING
> > SAID..........IT'S LIKE SAYING your homosexuality is a way of helping your
> > brothers and sisters to raise more children so you can group together in a
> > class of your own...If so why don't you publish your own paper and show us
> > all how they are wrong. ... but first, choose one that you think is most
> > suitable. .... Also, it doesn't come from 'Darwinism', since Darwin didn't
> > create it..
> >Clue for you, Adolf- ~nobody~ understands what you're saying, and
> >nobody wants to.
> >Your only value in any discussion is in providing derisive amusement,
> >but sadly, it has a short shelf life. I have begun to grow bored and
> >will soon have no more patience for you. Alas, you may no longer be
> >able to bask in the warm glow of my attention.
>
> LOL's....then off with you women and bow down to the master as you have not
> shown your worth in my grace.
Let it be known that the sky kings shall fuddle-duddle your feathers,
arachnoid gaucho. Meet you fate in the name of all things passion-
fruited.
> > > >You don't even know what terminally means.
>
> > > Really, wow.....how long have you been terminally ill in the speical
> > > olimpic's. I would support assisted suicide for people who are
> terminally
> > > ill like you socialists...
> > >Bwahaha! You're completely off your rocker and English is obviously
> > >not your first language. Try a translation program.
>
> > Oh please if your going to pretend your so kind of scienitic chimpness,
> > I'll crown you kong...
> >Lol. Translation programs are high science to you? I bet when you're
> >speaking your own language, even other Germans find your babble hard
> >to follow.
>
> What Utter nonsense you spout, as you seem to be in a class of your own. You
> note woman, from where I stand, I see you seem to have plenty of incentive
> in experienced by midgets standing on your shoulders wearing high heels and
> fishnet stockings...... As there Ain't no mountain high enough, that I can't
> climb..... :-)
Ah, yes, and the holy matriarch shall whip your sheafs of wheat on
Spanish Armada galleons on the shores of Great Slave Lake. Rise to
meet your fate, gynophobic pencil. The horses! The horses!
Lefty
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
Your chariot is waiting at the turnstile, carrying gold dubloons and a
whore's mother dressed in seersucker and bundle cloth. Find it in
yourself to rape the husk of the evening and the reward will be
everlasting cornholio.
Lefty
>
> Gee, I heard a feminazi say that once but got all buggered up when she had
> to tell the truth instead of dreaming about things that never were..
Gee, I heard the owls say your dangly-ding got caught in a tripwire
and you had to eat yourself free. Then you bastardized the persnickety
lesbian strip show with a ball peen hammer.
Lefty
Is there an echo in here? Again, you copied me almost word for word.
It's very flattering as it shows you admire my posting style.
> >you know perfectly well that
> > was in response to you begging the question by asking a question
> > assuming facts not in evidence.
>
> I didn't beg the question asswipe, and if you actually had a
> functional brain, you would know it.
Bullshit. Your argument is predicated on what you assumed was truth.
It is not predicated on established fact agreed upon between the
parties.
That is begging the question.
"Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the
claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume
that the conclusion is true. This sort of "reasoning" typically has
the following form.
1. Premises in which the truth of the conclusion is claimed or the
truth of the conclusion is assumed (either directly or indirectly).
2. Claim C (the conclusion) is true. "
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html
Let's recap;
Your asinine assumption- that support for reproductive choice means
one hates women. You did not support this premise with any evidence or
reasoning and it was not agreed upon or established as fact.
Your claim- that I hate women.
Dishonest and illogical. But that's all you are capable of.
> >The standard reply to that tactic is
> > "when did you stop beating your wife?" If you don't like it being
> > done to you, don't do it yourself, wife-beating thug.
>
> Woman hating baby killer wannabe.
<snicker!>
Running out of words? Just copy me so more, imbecile.
harry.maxtor.von.stien
Now your just being a sour grape.....
> > > >You don't even know what terminally means.
>
> > > Really, wow.....how long have you been terminally ill in the speical
> > > olimpic's. I would support assisted suicide for people who are
> terminally
> > > ill like you socialists...
> > >Bwahaha! You're completely off your rocker and English is obviously
> > >not your first language. Try a translation program.
>
> > Oh please if your going to pretend your so kind of scienitic chimpness,
> > I'll crown you kong...
> >Lol. Translation programs are high science to you? I bet when you're
> >speaking your own language, even other Germans find your babble hard
> >to follow.
>
> What Utter nonsense you spout, as you seem to be in a class of your own.
You
> note woman, from where I stand, I see you seem to have plenty of incentive
> in experienced by midgets standing on your shoulders wearing high heels
and
> fishnet stockings...... As there Ain't no mountain high enough, that I
can't
> climb..... :-)
Ah, yes, and the holy matriarch shall whip your sheafs of wheat on
Spanish Armada galleons on the shores of Great Slave Lake. Rise to
meet your fate, gynophobic pencil. The horses! The horses!
LOL's....that's funny.....
harry.maxtor.von.stien
Really...wow
>Re; your question, I believe John Edwards and Bill Clinton have been
>spoofed for their sexual antics.
Ahhh but not in spoof porno unless you have the tapes of John Edwards and
Bill Clinton in bed together...
harry.maxtor.von.stien
>.Your chariot is waiting at the turnstile, carrying gold dubloons and a
>whore's mother dressed in seersucker and bundle cloth. Find it in
>yourself to rape the husk of the evening and the reward will be
>.everlasting cornholio.
Excellent, There's an obvious frisking/friskiness joke in there, that I
choose not to pursue.
You see, everybody out there dresses the same these days, or in this thread,
want to kill some fresh meat, so to put it plainly, informed her that she
was a dried-out husk and wasn't worth the gold dubloons ..Right,
"seersucker". I love it.
I'm glad you couldn't sleep.... Can't blame you for having to fully immerse
yourself in the role ... Remember The Third Eye is like the evening sky
when the stars first start appearing. .....the pain of seeing the daily rape
of the innocent live on earth by morals who cared nothing for it, or for
that matter what kind of spark it once had...Freud classifies the following
as an example of an innocent joke, gone bad..
Just look at those poor, pathetic socilaist people out there, fighting over
for scraps called rights, while the global elite rape you over and over for
all of your rights and freedoms to choose whatever you want ... Just as a
baby southern artist defending a little Pollack whore, and you know what, I
have had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this wasn't it. - Is there any
sanity or light left in this shrivelled husk of a world? ...or will you will
find yourself in some strange neighbor's yard wishing for comfort later
on.... However, don't whistle at night, or snakes will come an get you.
When you sneeze twice, it means someone is gossiping about you in the lousy
hotel's room..... Now cowgirl skills, that will come in handy when your
roping skills are deftly honed by tying together drapery cords, and make
sure that thistles will be carried for miles on the breeze, that way you
will not forget dead babies are no laughing matter when bad choices are
made....
harry.maxtor.von.stien
On Jun 23, 8:24 pm, "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..
296670.glb.na> wrote:
> "Lefty" <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:e8e33d0c-e62e-496d...@f19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 22, 11:21 pm, Voyager <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
>
> > x-no-archive: yes
> >.How is that harm, if it can't feel the pain or fear?
>
> Gee, I heard a feminazi say that once but got all buggered up when she had
> to tell the truth instead of dreaming about things that never were..
>Gee, I heard the owls say your dangly-ding got caught in a tripwire
>and you had to eat yourself free.
So now I can have gender-reassignment surgery. You seem to love fantasy
lesbian sex stories....does that make you a real live angry canibal
feminist, how cute..... In the show you were wearing full-body white
painter's suits and white masks, a real candidate for the cracker
factory....
>Then you bastardized the persnickety
>lesbian strip show with a ball peen hammer.
I got news for you, A cat almost always blinks when hit in the head with a
ball peen hammer.....the music like a visual ball peen hammer rappin' on
your optic nerve...
the_pc_jellllybean!!.!!!!
> To speak more natural English, learners like you should tell a joke
Okay.
Did you hear the one about the loony rightard fuckwit called
""harry.maxtor.von.stien"?
LOL!
harry.maxtor.von.stien
<tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!!> wrote in message
Some people like you grab the black jelly bean early on and die at a young
age. ..... Never trust a fart.
the_pc_jellllybean!!.!!!!
>
> <tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!!> wrote in message
> news:2tr9jc....@news.alt.net...
>>
>> "harry.maxtor.von.stien" <hmvs.global.gov@..296670.glb.na> wrote in
> message
>> news:Pzv0m.32076$Db2.28798@edtnps83...
>
>> > To speak more natural English, learners like you should tell a joke
>
>> Okay.
>> Did you hear the one about the loony rightard fuckwit called
>> ""harry.maxtor.von.stien"?
>> LOL!
>
Why do jews frighten you so much, bumboy?
Duncan Patton a Campbell
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Jun 24, 11:20 am, Lefty <lefty_the_r...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> Good theory
>
> Cheerleader posts are lame.-
Net-Snarge is even lamer.
Duncan Patton a Campbell
> x-no-archive: yes
> ROFLMAO. As baby-killer wannabes go, you have got to be one of the
> dumbest.
Babies have no gills. Do fish have souls? Ask PETA.
Harry.Maxtor.Von.Stien
<tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!!> wrote in message
Why do you fags believe in the The Islamic Mein Kampf, fruitnick....
Ray Fischer
>Actually, calling an unborn human a fetus to deny its essential human
>character has no place in any debate.
"Actually, calling an unborn human a [sperm] to deny its essential
human character has no place in any debate."
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>And we also know that it's usual for the abortion rights crowd to
>claim that using correct terms like "unborn child" and "unborn baby"
>is out of bounds.
As opposed to your rejection of terms like "unfertilized baby"?
But you're crazy and you believe that YOUR beliefs are infallible
Truth.
> The playing field is level--or would be if the
>abortion rights crowd didn't play "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no
>evil" to massive campaigns of slander by the group I call the Seven
And so the crazy nutter goes off on another one of his little rants.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>On Jun 22, 5:52 pm, IAAH <n...@email.exist> wrote:
>> It's quite amusing, to see that you think that science is on
>> your side and yet you decry the correct use of proper terms.
>
>I don't think science is on my side. I am on the side of science.
And yet you object to the correct use of terminology.
>Science establishes that a unique human life begins at conception,
That is an outright lie.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Duncan Patton a Campbell
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> On Jun 25, 12:57 am, Duncan Patton a Campbell <campb...@neotext.ca>
> Born human babies have no gills.
Right. Humans have no gills.
Dhu
>
>>Do fish have souls? Ask PETA.
>
> Do you have a soul? Doesanyone?
>
>> Dhu
>>
>> --
>> Duncan Patton a Campbell is Dhu- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -