
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
NMOCM |
|||
|
It's as much my business as it is if someone chooses to have you bumped off.
|
|||
Purandara |
|||
NMOCM wrote:No, it isn't. I'm not a part of someone else's body. I'm a fully functioning, sapient person, not a glob of cells growing inside someone else. Try again. |
|||
SuperSnuggie |
|||
NMOCM wrote: From dictionary.com: par·a·site(pār'ə-sīt') n.
So which part are you disagreeing with? That fetuses are organisms? That the host is a different organism? Or that the little parasite contributes nothing? |
|||
didanyoneusethis |
|||
|
A "parasite" is something of a different species feeding off you in and producing harmful effects to the host. Your own
child is the same species, and there are health benifits for having had children. It's never used to describe one's own offspring.
You must be a woman, since you seem to not be able to refrain from ridiculous, overly emotional and irrational statements.
|
|||
SuperSnuggie |
|||
|
*shrug*
I'm just telling you what dictionary.com says. If you don't like the definitions they provide, take it up with them, not me. |
|||
hmcclungiii |
|||
|
Actually, parasite would be an accurate term for a fetus. It is not prerequisite for the parasite or host to be of different species. And the constant internal
battle of survival in the womb tends to push the parasitic definition to the point of undeniability.
You see, when the man has sex, he implicitly takes on obligations if a child is conceived. It's, however, pure fascism to imply that a woman takes on obligations by her engaging in sexual intercourse.That is pure hypocritical, double-standard, bullshit. |
|||
didanyoneusethis |
|||
A parasite is an organism that associates with the host in a negative, unhealthy and nonessential (nonessential to the host) manner which will often damage the host and detrimentally affect the procreative capacity of the host (and species). A human embryo or fetus is a human being that associates with the mother in a positive, healthful essential manner necessary for the procreation of the
species.
Note: When some people claim preborn children are parasites, they mean "parasite" in its pejorative, that is, in its social-ethical
sense. Prof. Johnson's article addresses only the biological meaning of "parasite." Libertarians for Life responds to the pejorative sense in
other articles. Briefly, as libertarians, we strongly agree that women as well as men have the right to control their own bodies. Nonetheless, we hold that
under principles of individual liberty, parents have the obligation to support their dependent children. Our children have a right to our support,
whether they are in the crib or in the womb.
http://www.l4l.org/library/notparas.html
You peeps are still using the crazy crap that was scientifically put to rest decades ago. |
|||
NMOCM |
|||
|
The people making the "parasite" argument just expose themselves as intellectually dishonest (unless outright insane). No one actually believes that
a fetus is a parasite. All of these people know that embryology textbooks aren't going to call a fetus a parasite. They know full well that they're
full of shit. They've just sunk to that level to pursue their romance with homicide.
|
|||
Tibeerius |
|||
NMOCM wrote: What it comes down to it...they know they need to "dehumanize" fetuses so they can rationalize away the fact they're killing a baby purely for thier convenience. |
|||
Purandara |
|||
|
Why would anyone need to "dehumanize" a non-human? Reality already did the work...
|
|||
357m |
|||
|
Tissue mass, zygote, parasite... In the history of mankind, no one group has more successfully used verbiage to dehumanized another class of people than
feminists have with unborn babies.
Hell, they've raised the slaughter to the level of an international human rights celebration. |
|||
not2serious |
|||
|
Do adults live inside of other people, feeding parasitically off of them?
Yeah, that's what I thought. A glob of cells does not a sapient life form make. I agree. the glob of cells called tiller, who was not a sapient life form, was simply "aborted" in the 214th trimester. Either all stages in human development must be protected, or none are. So Tiller was aborted, you are right, he was feeding off of other people. We all do. It is called "society". Either everyone has value, or none have value. Today it is a fetus, tomorrow it is "old people", "negros" etc.... And the child is NOT hers, no more than the woman is "his". If someone can abort a child in the third trimester, then someone can abort you in the 200th trimester. Allan |
|||
Wyld One 100 |
|||
Either everyone has value, or none have value. So poor people and rich people are equally valued in our society? |
|||
SuperSnuggie |
|||
|
Well, this article was written by an obstetrician.
http://www.babyzone.com/p...e/anatomy-fetus-placenta The fetus is a demanding and efficient parasite, and its agent is the placenta. Apparently HE thinks fetuses are parasites. There is also the case of fetus-in-fetu, or parasitic twinning. In that case, the parasite is not only the same species as the host, but genetically identical to the host. |
|||
NMOCM |
|||
Wyld One 100 wrote: If by valued equally you mean given the dignity to which human life is entitled, for the most part, yes. |
|||
not2serious |
|||
|
If by valued equally you mean given the dignity to which human life is entitled, for the most part, yes.
The liberal confusion about equal opportunity = equal results. Social darwinism keeps the species strong. Allan |
|||
hmcclungiii |
|||
|
Just for the record, I am against abortion except in extreme circumstances that threaten the mothers life. I do, however, agree that a fetus shares many
characteristics of a parasite, but not in a pejorative sense as has been suggested. But when the argument on either side is bologna, I'll feel
free to point it out. A fetus is about as close to a parasite as you can get without subscribing to the exact definition of the term. Whether you like the word
or not is your problem, it is what it is.
|
|||
not2serious |
|||
|
Just for the record, I am against abortion except in extreme circumstances that threaten the mothers life. I do, however, agree that a fetus shares
many characteristics of a parasite, but not in a pejorative sense as has been suggested. But when the argument on either side is bologna, I'll
feel free to point it out. A fetus is about as close to a parasite as you can get without subscribing to the exact definition of the term. Whether you like the
word or not is your problem, it is what it is.
I agree with your "only to SAVE the life of the mother". No other exception, and the mothers life must truly be in absolute danger, not a "maybe". The difference of MOST children in the womb, is they are a result of a self inflicted infestation, a willing participant in the circumstance if you must be accurate. They CHOSE to be infected, or took the risk therein. A motorcycle daredevil takes a risk of injury or death from jumping 26 cars etc. He/she makes a CHOICE to the risk involved in either case. And finally, children are parasites well after they are born, I raised 7 of them and now have the 2 year old granddaughter I am now raising. It is a symbiont relationship designed by nature, who has over a billion years of experimentation with life and has certain rules. It also fits into natures laws "survival of the fittest". Anyone who is female, and chooses to kill off their own offspring, is a biological failure, and probably should not be allowed to attempt to reproduce again by law. Allan |
|||