Are you really...
 

True North wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 August 2015 17:50:12 UTC-3, Califbill wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 16:03:58 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 13:59:10 -0500, Califbill billnews wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:47:43 -0500, Califbill billnews wrote:

Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 11:40:48 -0400, John H.
wrote:

FLORIDA SAFE HAVEN LAW:

You can leave your baby, up to 7 days old, with an employee at any hospital,
emergency room, emergency medical services station or with a fire
fighter at any fire
station in Florida.

http://www.nationalsafehavenalliance..._Haven_Law.pdf

===

Great. What happens to the baby after that?

Especially crack babies.

Well hell, should crack babies be put to death?

My daughter adopted a baby that suffered from fetal alcohol syndrome. The kid has
some problems, but is a great kid nevertheless.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

They are very hard to place. Maybe better orphanages?

===

Orphanages can be awful places, especially for children with emotional
or intellectual disabilities. Far better for all concerned to
terminate the pregnancy at some early stage.

So test for crack, or whatever, and kill the human life...

You have to admit you're looking for exceptions. Are *all* crack babies better off
dead?
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Maybe. Might be better to kill the mother at the same time. One stupid
enough to use crack, let alone get pregnant while doing crack, would be
better removed from the gene pool.


Hey Kalif..while you're at it, you may as well terminate the father
too....and what about both sets of grandparents?

I see you are showing your low IQ again. The father is probably 22 years
old and has 25 kids. At least castrate him.

Are you really...
 

On 8/26/2015 7:52 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:40:19 -0400, John H.
wrote:

Nothing religious about it. It is life. It is human.

===

That's ridiculous. There's nothing human about a small collection of
cells that start multiplying.



The problem with that argument (which has been the common accepted
consensus until recently) is that it has been determined by scientists
that the small collection of multiplying cells contains all the DNA of a
human being and is certainly living and growing from the moment of
fertilization. Nothing religious about it at all.

Are you really...
 

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 21:05:10 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 20:54:42 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:52:59 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:40:19 -0400, John H.
wrote:

Nothing religious about it. It is life. It is human.

===

That's ridiculous. There's nothing human about a small collection of
cells that start multiplying.

But when the heart can be heard, the sex determined, and the hands and feet visible
in a sonogram? That's still a 'small collection of cells'?

Of course not.

There, that's progress.


The morning after pill does not bother me. There is no way to know if that 'small
collection of cells' existed or not.

That's progress.

The problem is that anytime someone suggests that a mother should be
able to terminate a pregnancy in its early stages, you start talking
about killing babies.

When do you consider a human life to exist?

"At the end of the 8th week, the elbows become obvious, the feet, hands and even the
fingers maybe distinguishable. The brain cavities are easily seen as large 'holes' in
the embryonic head. The heart rate has increased to 160 bpm and the heart covers
about 50% of the chest area. In some cases, it is possible to recognize the
fluid-filled stomach below the heart at the end of week 8."

Look at the 8 weeks scan. Is that just a 'collection of cells'?

http://baby2see.com/development/ultr...ans.html#week8

Yet that's pretty early in the pregnancy.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Are you really...
 

On 8/27/15 1:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 8/26/2015 7:52 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:40:19 -0400, John H.
wrote:

Nothing religious about it. It is life. It is human.

===

That's ridiculous. There's nothing human about a small collection of
cells that start multiplying.



The problem with that argument (which has been the common accepted
consensus until recently) is that it has been determined by scientists
that the small collection of multiplying cells contains all the DNA of a
human being and is certainly living and growing from the moment of
fertilization. Nothing religious about it at all.


As if conservative righties pushing their anti-abortion agenda give a
**** about "life."

Are you really...
 

On 8/26/15 9:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
True North wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 August 2015 17:50:12 UTC-3, Califbill wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 16:03:58 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 13:59:10 -0500, Califbill billnews wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:47:43 -0500, Califbill billnews wrote:

Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 11:40:48 -0400, John H.
wrote:

FLORIDA SAFE HAVEN LAW:

You can leave your baby, up to 7 days old, with an employee at any hospital,
emergency room, emergency medical services station or with a fire
fighter at any fire
station in Florida.

http://www.nationalsafehavenalliance..._Haven_Law.pdf

===

Great. What happens to the baby after that?

Especially crack babies.

Well hell, should crack babies be put to death?

My daughter adopted a baby that suffered from fetal alcohol syndrome. The kid has
some problems, but is a great kid nevertheless.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

They are very hard to place. Maybe better orphanages?

===

Orphanages can be awful places, especially for children with emotional
or intellectual disabilities. Far better for all concerned to
terminate the pregnancy at some early stage.

So test for crack, or whatever, and kill the human life...

You have to admit you're looking for exceptions. Are *all* crack babies better off
dead?
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Maybe. Might be better to kill the mother at the same time. One stupid
enough to use crack, let alone get pregnant while doing crack, would be
better removed from the gene pool.


Hey Kalif..while you're at it, you may as well terminate the father
too....and what about both sets of grandparents?

I see you are showing your low IQ again. The father is probably 22 years
old and has 25 kids. At least castrate him.



You come across as crazier almost every time you post. Seriously.

Are you really...
 

Keyser Söze
- hide quoted text -
On 8/26/15 9:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
True North wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 August 2015 17:50:12 UTC-3, Califbill *wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 16:03:58 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 13:59:10 -0500, Califbill billnews wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:47:43 -0500, Califbill billnews wrote:

Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 11:40:48 -0400, John H.
wrote:

FLORIDA SAFE HAVEN LAW:

You can leave your baby, up to 7 days old, with an employee at any hospital,
emergency room, emergency medical services station or with a fire
fighter at any fire
station in Florida.

http://www.nationalsafehavenalliance..._Haven_Law.pdf

===

Great. *What happens to the baby after that?

Especially crack babies.

Well hell, should crack babies be put to death?

My daughter adopted a baby that suffered from fetal alcohol syndrome. The kid has
some problems, but is a great kid nevertheless.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

They are very hard to place. *Maybe better orphanages?

===

Orphanages can be awful places, especially for children with emotional
or intellectual disabilities. *Far better for all concerned to
terminate the pregnancy at some early stage.

So test for crack, or whatever, and kill the human life...

You have to admit you're looking for exceptions. Are *all* crack babies better off
dead?
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Maybe. *Might be better to kill the mother at the same time. *One stupid
enough to use crack, let alone get pregnant while doing crack, would be
better removed from the gene pool.


Hey Kalif..while you're at it, you may as well terminate the father
too....and what about both sets of grandparents?

I see you are showing your low IQ again. *The father is probably 22 years
old and has 25 kids. *At least castrate him.



"You come across as crazier almost every time you post. Seriously."



Kalif Swill has never recovered from that tumble off the roof.

Are you really...
 

On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 05:00:17 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote:

Keyser Söze
- hide quoted text -
On 8/26/15 9:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
True North wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 August 2015 17:50:12 UTC-3, Califbill *wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 16:03:58 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 13:59:10 -0500, Califbill billnews wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:47:43 -0500, Califbill billnews wrote:

Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 11:40:48 -0400, John H.
wrote:

FLORIDA SAFE HAVEN LAW:

You can leave your baby, up to 7 days old, with an employee at any hospital,
emergency room, emergency medical services station or with a fire
fighter at any fire
station in Florida.

http://www.nationalsafehavenalliance..._Haven_Law.pdf

===

Great. *What happens to the baby after that?

Especially crack babies.

Well hell, should crack babies be put to death?

My daughter adopted a baby that suffered from fetal alcohol syndrome. The kid has
some problems, but is a great kid nevertheless.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

They are very hard to place. *Maybe better orphanages?

===

Orphanages can be awful places, especially for children with emotional
or intellectual disabilities. *Far better for all concerned to
terminate the pregnancy at some early stage.

So test for crack, or whatever, and kill the human life...

You have to admit you're looking for exceptions. Are *all* crack babies better off
dead?
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Maybe. *Might be better to kill the mother at the same time. *One stupid
enough to use crack, let alone get pregnant while doing crack, would be
better removed from the gene pool.


Hey Kalif..while you're at it, you may as well terminate the father
too....and what about both sets of grandparents?

I see you are showing your low IQ again. *The father is probably 22 years
old and has 25 kids. *At least castrate him.



"You come across as crazier almost every time you post. Seriously."



Kalif Swill has never recovered from that tumble off the roof.

Actually, the person who suggested killing fathers and grandparents is showing the
low IQ. Wouldn't you agree?
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Are you really...
 

On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 01:15:17 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/26/2015 7:52 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:40:19 -0400, John H.
wrote:

Nothing religious about it. It is life. It is human.

===

That's ridiculous. There's nothing human about a small collection of
cells that start multiplying.



The problem with that argument (which has been the common accepted
consensus until recently) is that it has been determined by scientists
that the small collection of multiplying cells contains all the DNA of a
human being and is certainly living and growing from the moment of
fertilization. Nothing religious about it at all.

===

It's still a philosophical/religious issue. There's nothing human
about a clump of DNA even though the potential is there. Trying to
pinpoint the exact moment a fetus becomes "human" is a more or less a
pointless exercise except for those who are dead set against abortion
on religious grounds. Why anyone would want to force a woman to bring
an unwanted baby into the world is beyond me.

Are you really...
 

On 8/27/2015 9:04 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 01:15:17 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/26/2015 7:52 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:40:19 -0400, John H.
wrote:

Nothing religious about it. It is life. It is human.

===

That's ridiculous. There's nothing human about a small collection of
cells that start multiplying.



The problem with that argument (which has been the common accepted
consensus until recently) is that it has been determined by scientists
that the small collection of multiplying cells contains all the DNA of a
human being and is certainly living and growing from the moment of
fertilization. Nothing religious about it at all.

===

It's still a philosophical/religious issue. There's nothing human
about a clump of DNA even though the potential is there. Trying to
pinpoint the exact moment a fetus becomes "human" is a more or less a
pointless exercise except for those who are dead set against abortion
on religious grounds. Why anyone would want to force a woman to bring
an unwanted baby into the world is beyond me.



I am not questioning the right of a woman to abort an unwanted
pregnancy. I *am* questioning the conventional wisdom as to when "life"
begins. We've used a scientific/medical definition for many years that
takes the edge off the idea that a life is being taken.
The scientific/medical opinion is changing, although the legal has not.

Personally, I am pro-life but can understand circumstances that dictate
an abortion. I am completely against abortions "for convenience".

Are you really...
 

On 8/27/15 1:20 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 8/27/2015 9:04 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 01:15:17 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/26/2015 7:52 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:40:19 -0400, John H.
wrote:

Nothing religious about it. It is life. It is human.

===

That's ridiculous. There's nothing human about a small collection of
cells that start multiplying.



The problem with that argument (which has been the common accepted
consensus until recently) is that it has been determined by scientists
that the small collection of multiplying cells contains all the DNA of a
human being and is certainly living and growing from the moment of
fertilization. Nothing religious about it at all.

===

It's still a philosophical/religious issue. There's nothing human
about a clump of DNA even though the potential is there. Trying to
pinpoint the exact moment a fetus becomes "human" is a more or less a
pointless exercise except for those who are dead set against abortion
on religious grounds. Why anyone would want to force a woman to bring
an unwanted baby into the world is beyond me.



I am not questioning the right of a woman to abort an unwanted
pregnancy. I *am* questioning the conventional wisdom as to when "life"
begins. We've used a scientific/medical definition for many years that
takes the edge off the idea that a life is being taken.
The scientific/medical opinion is changing, although the legal has not.

Personally, I am pro-life but can understand circumstances that dictate
an abortion. I am completely against abortions "for convenience".


Remember, every sperm is sacred.