gnidrologs ([info]gnidrologs) rakstīja,
@ 2019-02-06 20:10:00

Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
kaut kā tā
But the scientist is right, up until 24 weeks in the UK a foetus is just a bundle of string and wires, the next day after the 24th week is up it magically transforms into a human being. That is settled science and will be forever settled until the abortion lobby in the UK push for later abortions.

In many other countries in Europe though the string and wire bundle magically transforms into a baby after only just 12 weeks! That's settled science, unless the woman makes a different choice later as in many European countries and she can push to have a later abortion, with permission from health professionals who undo the magic spell on the "baby," and return it to it's string and wires state, before yanking it out.

New York have just said the magic human spell doesn't happen until the string and wires are born, then they become human. That's settled science.

In Virginia now it seems the ball of string and wires even after birth can be torn apart on request of the "mother," in consultation with the "Magic man (doctor)" Who could also perform the "human spell" after birth to turn the string into a baby, it's the woman's choice. That's settled science.

This is why I don't have an opinion on abortion really, as the so called experts are just setting abitrary limits and playing God deciding when a foetus is classed as human, is it 12 weeks, 24 weeks, the point of delivery, after birth, what is it? What is a good cut off point? These experts are just flaying around, throwing random numbers out there and trying to justify it by pretending there is some sort of scientific method at work there, these people just view the child as a piece of string and wires as it makes it easier for them to kill it, they try to hide from the horrific nature of abortion behind white coats.

That being said I am not against all abortion. I just dislike the flippant way it is being viewed as a legitimate lifestyle choice instead of being one of the hardest decisions a person should ever have to make. And also I dislike the arrogant nature of the experts who pretend to know what the cut-off point is when a baby becomes human, to try to soothe their guilt and moral qualms and use "settled science," (that none of them can agree on) as a shield as they yank a moving living breathing baby out of it's mother then toss it in the trash. They can't admit to themselves or anyone else they are performing an horrific act, though sometimes, in my opinion, it might be a necessary evil.


(Lasīt komentārus) - (Ierakstīt jaunu komentāru)


[info]gnidrologs
2019-02-10 16:04 (saite)
So, randomlī killot lohus, kas ne sūda nedomā ir košer?

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)


[info]axsys
2019-02-10 17:34 (saite)
"Ne sūda nedomā" šādā izpildījumā ir vnk metafōra, tas par smadzenēm ir ciets fakts. Cilvēkus ar neglābjami nobojātām smadzenēm var killot un tas vispār arī tiek darīts, ja neesi pamanījis.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)


[info]gnidrologs
2019-02-10 17:57 (saite)
Tātad killot kaut kādus komunistus būtu okej? Un nē, tā nav metafora. Tu burtiski centies man pierādīt, ka intelekts ir vienīgais parametrs kas nosaka killošanas morālo pieļaujamību. No šīs loģikas izriet, kas jo stulbāks cilvēks, jo pieņemamāk killot.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)


[info]axsys
2019-02-10 18:11 (saite)
Es burtiski cenšos pierādīt ka cilvēks bez smadzenēm (ne kā metafora bet kā fakts) nav cilvēks un uz to neattiecas jebkādi tur morālie pieļāvumi. "Dārzeņi" ar iznīcinātām smadzenēm, embriji pirms tur zināma vecuma, droši vien ir vēl kkādi piemēri ko es uzreiz nezinu.

Un kāpēc ne, ja vispār kādus cilvēkus jākillo tad idioti man pietrūktu vismazāk.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)


[info]gnidrologs
2019-02-10 23:48 (saite)
Pierādi, ka cilvēkus ar smadzenēm nedrīkst killot. Pierādi.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais)


(Lasīt komentārus) -

Neesi iežurnalējies. Iežurnalēties?