Isla Vista killing....the NRA's fault?

Because that is exactly what it is. By any scientific measure the fetus is a living human being. At the instant of conception a new sequence of DNA that never existed before comes into being. That DNA has all the code that will determine if that baby will have blue eyes or curly hair.

The only legal difference between you and that baby is the arbitrary philosophical construct called personhood. Personhood is made up bull shit so liberals can say that abortion may end a human life, but that human life isn't a person. Don't you see the danger in that? Based on on completely made up measures we are saying its ok to kill babies because they aren't people. An Oxford medical ethicist wrote a paper about two years ago arguing for infanticide because an infant is not conscious and therefore should not be considered a person. That is the dangerous slope that exists when you base life rights not on science, but on what someone's philosophy.

So tell me why is it murder if i kill a baby with a billion cells, but not murder when you kill a baby with one cell? How many cells does the baby have to have before you can't kill it? 100 million? Only 50 million? Or how bout we make sence and say we can't kill anybody?

 

Law and half the population are wrong about lots of things.

Neither can a 3 month old. Should we be allowed to kill them?

If the fetus were a part of the mother's body why does it have different DNA? The abortion debate is not about what the mother can do to her own body, it is about what she can do to the baby's body.

 

Some people can't survive without government assistance. Can we kill those people as well?

 

It is just a poor one.

Yeah. Babies need to be cared for, and for a long time. It is why the independence argument is so bad. Completely arbitrary and a function of medical technology.

Depends on the cell. A human embryo is exactly a baby. It even says so in embryology text books.

Further demonstrating your own confusion eh? A bacteria isn't a human. An embryo is.

As long as you keep hashing out your tired terrible points, I will keep hashing out my tired succinct rebuttals. If you don't like it you can use the ignore function.

And I don't have a temper. I'm the most laid back mother fucker in town. You are the dude who always gets hot and bothered with me. I think it is because I dare question your pontificates.

 

So then there should be no death penalty either. Is a tapeworm a life too? Personhood is important. I'm sorry a few cells doesn't make a person. And if abortion means I won't have to support someone else's mistake with my tax dollars then I'm all for it over and over and over again.

 

Wow, just freaking wow!

 

So you are in favor of killing the not yet born innocent but against killing depraved sociopaths who have taken the lives of others in some of the most heinous ways possible? You don't mind your tax dollars paying for killers to eat, sleep and watch TV while their victims have long been worm food

 

I'd be ok with that, but I think anyone can see there is a difference between a person convicted of a crime so heinous it warrants death and a baby who exists.

Yes, but not a human one. That is the distinction you are some how unable to make.

I think we should leave personal philosophy aside when we are talking about human rights. Lets err on what can be verified by fact. Like life begins at conception.

If that is your standard why don't we go around murdering poor people? Don't you see how awful and silly your logic is here?