>You'd also end up banning in-vitro fertilization, because they do throw away lots of embryos.
Of course I would. It should be banned.
>You're the fundamentalist idealogue with his fingers in his ears screaming wrong at me while I take your definitions and show you how short-sighted they are.
You take stuff from me. Then you take stuff from thin air, add some of your own dirt and mix it all together. Few presumptions and you're ready to fire. I feel proven wrong already.
EVERYONE defines zygote as human life but you. The fact that dispite this fact they still see it undeserving of life because it doesn't resemble them is stupidity. You think you proved something, but indeed you didn't prove anything except that you can't differentiate human life from unfertilized eggs, and that you like your cat more than people.
The thing is, I'm refusing to stoop to your level of reasoning, and view things mechanically, simplified - broken down to elements. I'm not going to try to convince you using your logic. Even if I did that, you'd create new bubbles to hide in (been there). So I won't. Human life begins with conception. No if's or but's. Killing it is murder.
You call me whatever you want. But I'm not a murderer and will never allow for it. And I'm proud that I let emotions into what I say. At least I have them.
I'll speak my mind now, thumb me down I don't care: That last line from the post kicks ass. Something uncommon for the godless Slashdot community. Proves not all of you are bad:-P
>How can you murder something that could never have become a human being?
If the DNA isn't human, it's not a human. If it is, it is. There's developing stages, but it's all human. Reaching a stage or not is irrelevant for that fact.
>If I am a parasite, what organism is my host?
Farmers. *shrugs*
>See, the funny thing is, if you actually had a logical and rational argument that was supported with scientific facts, I would believe it in a heartbeat. Instead, you have nothing but your anger.
Yeah, hilarious. Interesting how you can define a human being as other than a live organism with human DNA. And then expect me to disprove you without opposing your anti-definition. Had it not been for your presumption of what a human being is, you'd admit alive zygote with human DNA qualifies.
I insist the comparison is flawed because removing chimera is not killing a whole being, whereas killing a zygote clearly is.
>Come up with a better way of defining how a pack of undifferentiated cells is a human.
No, I don't. Why would I want to argue an obvious thing like that? That's as preposterous as if I asked you to prove that removing cells from your body is murder. You don't need a cell here or there, but eventually you'll die regardless.
>Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the aborted embryo was in fact a viable embryo that would have grown into a human being?
Huh? I don't need to. Zygote alone is a human being, I don't need it to grow into an embryo to establish that.
>This is such a horrendous distortion of my position
Right, you were saying that a human being is human since the moment it can survive with non-natural help. That's much more rational (I bet you thought of this on your own).
>The woman aborted an embryo because the pregnancy would have probably killed her.
I'm sorry, I missed any woman we were talking about. Would the "parasite" consume her? Also "probably" is very nice. Killer non-babies. As long as we keep in mind who's the victim here, right?
>You know nothing about me and what I do.
You think I'd care? You're still a "parasite". See in a world of relative morality, we don't think that even feeding the third world is deserving of being fed. In fact, you're wasting even more resources on other "parasites".
>If it makes you feel better to demonize me, go ahead.
Your words demonize you just fine. However, I fear readers here might not see through the mask of rationality you put on. Who was it - Hitler? - that said people are more willing to believe a complex lie than a simpler truth. You can rationalize everything, but I'm still going to call it what it is.
>I have enough faith in my position that I don't need to call you names...I'm sorry that you lack such faith of your own.
Don't mistake my being angry about your willful ignorance for being wrong.
Is the elimination of chimera result in the being being killed? Because a murder of a first cell will. And your comparison is as empty as your "machines" argument. See human kids are notorious for not being able to function on their own for several months *after* they are born. That, or being unconscious (comma, sleeping) makes a person no less human. Parasite by definition or not, calling a baby that is being disgusting and inappropriate. You're a parasite on the world's resources, and I'm not voting to remove you from the face of the Earth on those grounds.
Wrong. From the first cell it's a new being with distinct DNA which determines all of its characteristics visible after birth. It's obviously alive and human. So abortion is killing human life. It doesn't mean if human can experience it being robbed of life. To call a baby a parasite is sick ugly idea that bunch of murderous women gathered with the same unholy goal thought of.
Ok am I missing something - isn't space garbage small in comparison to the "orbit" - whose area is greater than the the surface of earth (seas combined) of course? Perhaps everyone is firing up everything at the same spot... Chinese and Americans alike... I don't get it:-/
P.S. Speaking of trash, what stops us from sending ours towards the Sun or other stars or hot planets? They'd only burn/melt eventually as far as I can tell.
You're right, the Church should apologize for the awful things it has done: founded first universities, preserved the western thought after the fall of the Roman empire, educated (educates), done(does) charitable work in poorest of countries, where people know the true meaning of not having anything to eat. It's common knowledge that Inquisition killed millions, right(hint: take a look at total population at those times, and also compare the influence of Inquisition, with say plague or wars) - never mind that heretics and others were linched at the time prior to Inquisition without being given any trial. Oh, and Crusades - lest we forget, it's all church's fault - who cares about historical reasons, and what kind of people really went to war.
>How is it the Church doesn't admit past mistakes, and ask forgiveness? Not just empty talk, but showing some genuine contrition.
"The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is cancelled" - US threatening Europe. Now, someone's crazy here. And it's not Europe (see also: software patents).
Where peace prize must go according to the will of Alfred Noble: "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."
Since we disregarded the latter in case of Obama (the peace thing), nothing stops us from disregarding the former (the person thing). If they redefine it to mean "people who USE Internet", I'll sell you mine, so you can have two since it obviously means nothing anymore.
That might seem obvious to you, but pretending algorithms aren't "computer calculations" is what entire software patent law hinges on. The thing is that mathematical ideas are ineligible for patenting, so it's important to convince courts that that's what algorithms really are. Knuth himself felt obligated to point this out: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090603224807259
Yes that's definitely a plus side: "Sure they can cheat with cards, Father, but on the plus side, they can throw them at each other during mass" Somehow I don't think you got all your signatures.
I think our understanding of the brain is primitive, and we still can't say anything for certain. But now you see how bad "euthanasia" is, or at least how evil it is to promote it based on statistics or (even educated) opinions without certainty.
Now if only we can explain that trackers don't hold any content, only a means for people to connect to eachother, and that P2P networks aren't inherently evil, that'd be great.
Slashdot Mirror
>You'd also end up banning in-vitro fertilization, because they do throw away lots of embryos.
Of course I would. It should be banned.
>You're the fundamentalist idealogue with his fingers in his ears screaming wrong at me while I take your definitions and show you how short-sighted they are.
You take stuff from me. Then you take stuff from thin air, add some of your own dirt and mix it all together. Few presumptions and you're ready to fire. I feel proven wrong already.
EVERYONE defines zygote as human life but you. The fact that dispite this fact they still see it undeserving of life because it doesn't resemble them is stupidity. You think you proved something, but indeed you didn't prove anything except that you can't differentiate human life from unfertilized eggs, and that you like your cat more than people.
The thing is, I'm refusing to stoop to your level of reasoning, and view things mechanically, simplified - broken down to elements. I'm not going to try to convince you using your logic. Even if I did that, you'd create new bubbles to hide in (been there). So I won't. Human life begins with conception. No if's or but's. Killing it is murder.
You call me whatever you want. But I'm not a murderer and will never allow for it. And I'm proud that I let emotions into what I say. At least I have them.
I'll speak my mind now, thumb me down I don't care: That last line from the post kicks ass. :-P
Something uncommon for the godless Slashdot community.
Proves not all of you are bad
>it's not a human being until it can survive without a placenta. Humans have more in common with my pet cat than a blastocyst.
I give up. There's no helping you.
>How can you murder something that could never have become a human being?
If the DNA isn't human, it's not a human. If it is, it is. There's developing stages, but it's all human. Reaching a stage or not is irrelevant for that fact.
>If I am a parasite, what organism is my host?
Farmers. *shrugs*
>See, the funny thing is, if you actually had a logical and rational argument that was supported with scientific facts, I would believe it in a heartbeat. Instead, you have nothing but your anger.
Yeah, hilarious. Interesting how you can define a human being as other than a live organism with human DNA. And then expect me to disprove you without opposing your anti-definition. Had it not been for your presumption of what a human being is, you'd admit alive zygote with human DNA qualifies.
I bet Slashdot just DDoS'd North Korea.
>then chimeras are two people
I insist the comparison is flawed because removing chimera is not killing a whole being, whereas killing a zygote clearly is.
>Come up with a better way of defining how a pack of undifferentiated cells is a human.
No, I don't. Why would I want to argue an obvious thing like that? That's as preposterous as if I asked you to prove that removing cells from your body is murder. You don't need a cell here or there, but eventually you'll die regardless.
>Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the aborted embryo was in fact a viable embryo that would have grown into a human being?
Huh? I don't need to. Zygote alone is a human being, I don't need it to grow into an embryo to establish that.
>This is such a horrendous distortion of my position
Right, you were saying that a human being is human since the moment it can survive with non-natural help. That's much more rational (I bet you thought of this on your own).
>The woman aborted an embryo because the pregnancy would have probably killed her.
I'm sorry, I missed any woman we were talking about. Would the "parasite" consume her? Also "probably" is very nice. Killer non-babies. As long as we keep in mind who's the victim here, right?
>You know nothing about me and what I do.
You think I'd care? You're still a "parasite". See in a world of relative morality, we don't think that even feeding the third world is deserving of being fed. In fact, you're wasting even more resources on other "parasites".
>If it makes you feel better to demonize me, go ahead.
Your words demonize you just fine. However, I fear readers here might not see through the mask of rationality you put on. Who was it - Hitler? - that said people are more willing to believe a complex lie than a simpler truth. You can rationalize everything, but I'm still going to call it what it is.
>I have enough faith in my position that I don't need to call you names...I'm sorry that you lack such faith of your own.
Don't mistake my being angry about your willful ignorance for being wrong.
Is the elimination of chimera result in the being being killed? Because a murder of a first cell will. And your comparison is as empty as your "machines" argument. See human kids are notorious for not being able to function on their own for several months *after* they are born. That, or being unconscious (comma, sleeping) makes a person no less human. Parasite by definition or not, calling a baby that is being disgusting and inappropriate. You're a parasite on the world's resources, and I'm not voting to remove you from the face of the Earth on those grounds.
Wrong. From the first cell it's a new being with distinct DNA which determines all of its characteristics visible after birth. It's obviously alive and human. So abortion is killing human life. It doesn't mean if human can experience it being robbed of life.
To call a baby a parasite is sick ugly idea that bunch of murderous women gathered with the same unholy goal thought of.
No logic. All (intentional) abortions are killing innocent life. You still lack arguments.
Really, you can do way better than that.
Try again; if you think of a real argument, I'll address it with an actual answer.
What is surreal is that she's able to do this in this day and age.
There should be laws against abortion, and those pills should be illegal.
I see your sig all the time. You must be refreshing your feed like crazy to be among the first to post.
...100 THOUSAAAAAND!
Ok am I missing something - isn't space garbage small in comparison to the "orbit" - whose area is greater than the the surface of earth (seas combined) of course? :-/
Perhaps everyone is firing up everything at the same spot... Chinese and Americans alike... I don't get it
P.S. Speaking of trash, what stops us from sending ours towards the Sun or other stars or hot planets? They'd only burn/melt eventually as far as I can tell.
One could argue they're just processed info about the light on different parts of the set at given times.
Australian govt. is weird.
'I wasn't even thinking of how it [sic] easy it would for me to be caught,'
That's why you need sleep.
You're right, the Church should apologize for the awful things it has done: founded first universities, preserved the western thought after the fall of the Roman empire, educated (educates), done(does) charitable work in poorest of countries, where people know the true meaning of not having anything to eat. It's common knowledge that Inquisition killed millions, right(hint: take a look at total population at those times, and also compare the influence of Inquisition, with say plague or wars) - never mind that heretics and others were linched at the time prior to Inquisition without being given any trial. Oh, and Crusades - lest we forget, it's all church's fault - who cares about historical reasons, and what kind of people really went to war.
>How is it the Church doesn't admit past mistakes, and ask forgiveness? Not just empty talk, but showing some genuine contrition.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0003/12/sm.06.html - empty talk, right? Because we all know that's not really a true Scotsman.
"The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is cancelled" - US threatening Europe. Now, someone's crazy here. And it's not Europe (see also: software patents).
Where peace prize must go according to the will of Alfred Noble:
"to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."
Since we disregarded the latter in case of Obama (the peace thing), nothing stops us from disregarding the former (the person thing).
If they redefine it to mean "people who USE Internet", I'll sell you mine, so you can have two since it obviously means nothing anymore.
That might seem obvious to you, but pretending algorithms aren't "computer calculations" is what entire software patent law hinges on.
The thing is that mathematical ideas are ineligible for patenting, so it's important to convince courts that that's what algorithms really are. Knuth himself felt obligated to point this out: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090603224807259
Had you explained why, you'd have a +1 moderation right now.
Yes that's definitely a plus side: "Sure they can cheat with cards, Father, but on the plus side, they can throw them at each other during mass"
Somehow I don't think you got all your signatures.
I think our understanding of the brain is primitive, and we still can't say anything for certain. But now you see how bad "euthanasia" is, or at least how evil it is to promote it based on statistics or (even educated) opinions without certainty.
Now if only we can explain that trackers don't hold any content, only a means for people to connect to eachother, and that P2P networks aren't inherently evil, that'd be great.
Aren't as reliable though.