Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

vnel8tn

Members
  • Content Count

    561
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About vnel8tn

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Kaw
  1. I do believe that everyone deserves to pursue happiness and if you can't find it in your heart to love the next generation then we are probably better off without your progeny.... Wait...dadgum, that sounds like I might share some thoughts with Margaret Sanger...but I don't really believe that. I just think those holding that position have no idea what they are missing.
  2. This really is not a friendly forum for the non-leftists here, in the sense that it is awful lonely on this side. I have done an admirable job (from my perspective) of just trying to read as much as possible without interjecting. I reallllly wanted to interject on the Covington student debacle but I just held out...then the late term abortionist arguments hit and I couldn't help it. I am usually too busy to have the time to respond without getting dragged in to the pit, so I bite my tongue and just read as much as I can while resisting the urge to push back. But I do read as much as I can and despite the Siren's call I just do my best to not get sucked in. Tim got me, yet again, and for that, I do appreciate his attempts to engage in constructive dialogue on difficult topics.
  3. I'd argue that is arbitrary since it has definitively changed since Roe... Dang...I can't quit it when i know better than to be sucked in to the stinky bait... And Henry you should know better...counselor
  4. I have probably overstayed my welcome...the echochamber is deafening to those not immune.
  5. Please share your "non-arbitrary" delineation of personhood...i'll get the popcorn.
  6. Are you saying a stem cell = an embryo?
  7. I understand that you can't see it, but at one point in your existence, that was what you were...in total. Simple fact that you won't acknowledge.
  8. I beg to differ...every single human alive today was distinctly its own entity at conception.
  9. Has a stem cell ever been confused with a complete human being?
  10. Sorry, I guess that was a tad ambiguous. I define a "complete human being" as that 'entity' that begins at conception (I know you don't like that word entity, but I am not a skilled wordsmith like yourself), and at any stage of human development up to the natural death of that 'entity'. My prior attempt at defining it shorted those who might have lost some portion (I believe someone mentioned an arm/leg or organ or such being 'alive' but not human). That portion that is removed is not a human being, but part of the human from which it was removed. The remaining person, though no longer 'whole' is still a human being (person if you will).
  11. Sorry, I know you asked a similar question earlier and I hadn't had a chance to find it to respond. I believe from the point of conception, and until natural death, a complete human being (that was your original question I believe) is a person. Does that clear it up?
  12. I think there are various attempts by state legislatures to address this (i.e. heartbeat laws in Iowa and Louisiana), but they have been curtailed by judgments against them so far. Who knows when those might make it to the SC. But that is certainly potentially subject to change, despite the current standing. Like I stated earlier in this thread, I believe our nation has a long standing history of eventually getting right, the previously incorrectly decided questions of person-hood. But it takes a while.
  13. The specific abortion laws that were in the news recently, that I assumed was the premise behind your original post on this issue. New York...their laws differ from others.It was just celebrated by Cuomo and widely publicized. Surely you know this.
  14. You started this thread to try and assert the right to abortion should have no limits. To me, that is tasteless. Not recognizing the differentiation of a compelling state interest on behalf of the human fetus to me is tasteless. The fetus is not a willing participant in the abortion debate. I have purposefully tried to leave religion out of my argument and I recognize you are just trying to relate how viewpoints might be discounted. Nevertheless, I don't think that means they shouldn't be heard.
  15. We already have this and asserting that birth is the only possible delineation is incorrect. Different states have different criteria where the compelling state interest on behalf of the unborn fetus conflicts with the mother.