Atheism or agnosticism?Follow

I would really like to know how this is all related. I'm facinated.

Mmmm more like people who think the bare minimum should get them chicks and a medal

Poor nixnot.

No, it wont ever happen period.



Yes



You're not assisting anything if it happens naturally. Like I said, a newborn child needs assistance to live, do you support child neglect?

So like I said, what's all the huss-fuss about? Let it exit naturally if you don't want it. Since it "needs the mother assistance", just do nothing and let it naturally exit. Problem solved.

So... by being irrelevant, it added no value to the conversation, but you presented as if it did. I countered it to say it had no effect on the topic.



WTF.. You just admitted above that it was irrelevant. You agreed that it doesn't matter if the woman wants to be pregnant or not. It doesn't freakin matter. The thing is the still the same thing in both scenarios. Just because you want an abortion doesn't make it something else and just because you want to have a child doesn't make it something else.



It wasn't an analogy nor was that the point. The point was to show you that people have emotional attachments to their early stages of life because they know that represented them and not some parasite. By destroying that parasite, you are destroying that person. A parent knows that and that is why a "good" parent would never say that to their child, even if it were true.

More to the point is that connection is somehow lost when referencing to abortion. When pro-choice people talk, they say it's nothing but a group of cells that don't represent a person. Yet, you admit to be sad if your parents told you that they wanted to get rid of a some filthy 'ol parasite.

If you truly believed that those group of cells don't represent a person, then you shouldn't be upset unless they wanted to kill you AFTER the legal limit when society considers you a person. That isn't the case, because even you, considered yourself a person at 3 weeks in your mother.

Pla-Dow!!

You truly are pathetic, I said "Nice guys finish last"... You reallllly don't understand what that means... I mean, it's in English.. even if you never heard it before, you should be able to figure out. Yet, you can't.. This only supports the misconceptions you have in every other argument.

Your only counter is that it will die on it's own..... well, so will a newborn baby. What is your point? You're not ACTIVELY assisting the growth of the fetus. You simply being alive and healthy are the necessary conditions for the development. The same isn't true for a newborn. Just because you're alive and healthy doesn't mean anything for the newborn. You have to ACTIVELY assist growth or it will die.

So you're acknowledging the difference that it can and it will eventually turn into a person on it's own? That's good

You mean like internal organs?

I understand exactly what it means. In a conversation of specifically defining when you can call something life, your perception AFTER the definition is irrelevant. That's the whole point of having the definition made in the first place.

What if a woman who doesn't see the cells as a parasite, but a blessing and a child, but made the tough choice of having an abortion based on other personal issues? Can she now be charged for "killing" her child? NO! Because the law authorized abortions up to a certain time frame, so it doesn't matter that I think it's considered a child or if you think it's a parasite, the actual "thing" itself, never changed from the "thing" in the definition.

In another discussion, you might would have a point.

Not sure If I should attack this for missing the word 'sometimes', the fact that other people aren't allowed to add internal organs to you when you don't want them there, the general foolishness, or just let it pass by as "Alma as usual".

Not sure If I should attack this for missing the word 'sometimes', the fact that other people aren't allowed to add internal organs to you when you don't want them there, the general foolishness, or just let it pass by as "Alma as usual".

I'm not sure what you mean by "in relation to sex", but since Belkira doesn't want to play along, I'll explain her inaccuracies to you.

Firstly, I didn't say that good guys CAN'T get a girl. I said that they FINISH last, which means thy actually get a girl. Everyone is insinuating that I'm unable to get a girl from using that saying. Just because there exist guys who use that saying simply because they can't get a girl, it doesn't change the actual meaning of the saying.

Secondly, you're looking it at from a male's point of view (constantly being rejected until finding the right woman) as opposed from the female's point of view (continually falling for the wrong type of guy until finding a good man). There's been plenty of times when my relationship with a woman was accelerated because I was "so nice". I know I'm far from being the "nicest guy in the world", so that only tells me that their previous relationships were with dirtbags. When they tell me their stories (usually cheaters and guys who only want sex), my guess is correct. So although I was very successful with a woman, the "nice guy finishes last" still applies and there was no rejection.

Thirdly, that saying completely compliments the sayings "There aren't any good men left" and "All men are dogs". Women who believe that or say that only say that because they can't find a good guy.

So, all of you can pretend that isn't the truth, but as always, I keeps it real.

Note: I use "good guy" and "nice guy" synonymously. A "nice" guy might not be "good" for everyone. I'm using the term good as "treating women with respect and how they are supposed to be treated".


Edited, May 7th 2011 8:43pm by Almalieque

HEY GUYS, THE GRASS IS ALWAYS GREENER ON THE OTHER SIDE.

THIS IS TRUFAX BECAUSE EVERYONE SAYS IT.