"I'm going to plug up your uterus forever" sounds like really disgusting dirty talk.
"I'm going to plug up your uterus forever" sounds like really disgusting dirty talk.
Oh baby, my shaft is going to rock your fallopian tubes ohhhh baby
mmm put ur penile instrument up near my ovarian love trap mmmm
ah, the ovarian love trap: millions enter, but only one leaves
where is ebay's listings for uteran corks because there are some i just want to take care of as a favour to society
sometimes as many as eight can leave
solecistic would you like to join my campaign to remove and save all of women's eggs and sterilize them so that they can be complete whores and never pay any consequences but then when someone fucks up and wifes them they can procreate?
(it's a great idea until the procreation part)
it would be a hell of a lot easier to do that with men and their sperm than womenOriginally Posted by Atmosfear
just sayin'
PANDAS
If you don't like them, then get the fuck out.
by accident
yeah but part of the point is to restrict women's rights. things have really gotten out of hand recently with Obama's removal of the glass ceiling.
yep i am on board bro
I never thought it would quite go that far, but i definitely approve.
but atmosfear, if you never procreate, how do you plan on getting into dad tavern?
I'm all for sterilization for at least one full generation.
The next generation can figure it out from there
lik dis if u cry evertim
We should make all of her subsequent pregnancies result in abortions.
Indeed. And my point is that this is incoherent, as neither can define the term "living human being" without a biological grounding. Whatever society is doing when it creates this definition, it has nothing to do with what defines a human life. I guess I'm just annoyed at the intellectual dishonesty of the whole thing.My point was that something which is biologically alive, and a part of the human species, still isn't necessarily legally or ethically a living human being.
And I was being rhetorical with the species bit, you know?
Actually, I don't really care nor do I necessarily agree with that definition. That just seems like the most reasonable stage to declare it "human" rather than just a ball of cells, to use your definition.You think that the point of gestation is the obvious point to put a "bright line"
Last edited by ephekt; 11-05-2009 at 09:28 PM.
Okay, sorry. I should have picked up on that.
Regardless, even if you don't care about or agree with that definition, your mere assessment of it as the most reasonable is subjective and arbitrary. It's just what "seems right" (or seems reasonable I guess) to you personally. I'm sure you realize that... my point is, there's no escaping this sort of arbitrariness when it comes to placing the "bright line". Hence the rightness of atmosfear's comment that the line's placement is culturally rather than medically or biologically determined.
I don't necessarily agree that there needs to be a bright line, which is why I said "if there is a need..." Personally, I don't think the government should be involved in the issue. But anyway, the issue clearly isn't about when life begins; it's about when we grant the baby human rights. We already have precedence here so I don't see why abortion is a special issue (aside from some people's begging for special pleading). My whole point was that if we do rule on this legally, using social definitions is a horribly stupid thing to do, since as everyone seems to agree, they're all arbitrary.
It's all well and good to say that it's stupid to use social definitions since they are arbitrary and change with regularity, but what else do we have to go by to define where humanity begins?
So as coq says, what should we use? There's nothing else. You have talked about using scientific definitions, but as I said in my previous post, that doesn't in the slightest bit remove the need to make an arbitrary decision about where to place the line. Science can identify various points in embryonic/fetal development but it can't tell us which one marks the beginning of personhood because personhood is itself a socially constructed and defined concept, not a scientific one. THERE IS NO WAY to define a point at which it begins in any way that isn't arbitary and subjective. The definition is always going to be culturally determined. So no, using social definitions isn't a horribly stupid thing to do. It's the only thing we can do.
I've always maintained that people should be forcibly put on contraceptives at the age of 12, and should have to apply to be taken off. Then again, I favor a police state so. . .
This is pretty nasty, of course there should be a limitation. Why doesn't this hoe just get the ring?
Anyways, I believe law should intervene, maybe some jail time or something. She is killing fetuses out of laziness, it's horrible. I mean, i'm for abortion rights, but this is taking it a few steps further.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks