Sperm isn't human life. Without an egg and fertilization there's isn't a human life lost.

We don't have the right stop infants from further developing.
Science says I must eat. They provide nutrition and have no concept of mortality, or compassion. They are a different species. Abortion laws are human rights issue.

Criminals lose rights when they commit crimes. Jailing them isn't enough in my opinion.
You can call my stance "anti-abortion", rather than prolife. Sounds about right.

__________________
Society is produced by our wants and government by our wickedness ~Thomas Paine

"Sperm isn't human life. Without an egg and fertilization there's isn't a human life lost."

how is sperm from a human not human life? how is it not alive? it shows all the same signs of life (more actually) that embryos show.

"We don't have the right stop infants from further developing."

we have the right to stop embryos and early fetuses from developing. abortions are legal.

"Science says I must eat. They provide nutrition and have no concept of mortality, or compassion. They are a different species. Abortion laws are human rights issue."

science doesnt say you must eat meat. no concept of morality or compassion? if thats the case, why cant we kill them for whatever reason we want?

and whats this video showing?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yziU0cFHzTc

"They are a different species. Abortion laws are human rights issue."

well, yes theyre a different species, but why are our lives more valuable? is it simply because we can relate to one another? because we can protest and pursue revenge on each another? what is it?

"Criminals lose rights when they commit crimes. Jailing them isn't enough in my opinion."

ok, so you dont want to support your antiabortion view with the view of being prolife. so what do you base your criteria for right to life on exactly?

__________________
Remedial English - Rule #2:

Always check your answers against Google search results.

Basic human empathy?


The same thing that makes me feel humans are entitled to life in gernal, even after birth.


Because sperm have no chance of ever developing into a human being.


Because they could escape and/or threaten other people again in the future. That is why jail is insufficient for some crimes.



Only if you ignore the context. Criminals have done something that justifies death. Aborted children have not.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

In the same way a cell from your hand is not a human life. A sperm will never develop into a child.


Slavery used to be legal too. Are you saying that people were entitled to own slaves when it was legal? You agree that they deserved the right to own slaves?


Because we are self aware. Fetuses will eventually be self aware as well. Dogs will never be self aware. Rabbits and cows (as individuals) will never be self aware.


Empathy. Children deserve not to be killed.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

are you sickntired? nah, im just kidding. ill be back in a bit.

__________________
Remedial English - Rule #2:

Always check your answers against Google search results.

Abortion deals with killing individual human lives. The right to life, both what I am referring to and given by our constitution, referrs to individuals of the human species. Sperm has live cells but is not an individual human life.

Right, you know the law. Infants just like embryos and fetuses can't speak up for themselves but with just a small amount of time, they can.

This is far beyond what I can explain. Most societies have adopted this long long ago. Like many other species we eat meat. This has nothing to do with human rights.

Probably because it speaks to the mentality of the human that enjoys abuse. In our society it is unacceptable but in others it is.

I don't buy what the narrator is saying. It isn't proven that the hippo shows compassion. In fact hippos kill quite a few animals. They are very dangerous.

This is a much bigger issue than abortion. Human life has been more valuable to humans than other species' lives probably since human existance. Other species tend to adopt the same stance but not all.

The constitution which guarantees an equal right to life and the oppurtunities life can produce. Everyone deserves to exist. Those that violate that right of others do not deserve it.

__________________
Society is produced by our wants and government by our wickedness ~Thomas Paine

"Abortion deals with killing individual human lives. The right to life, both what I am referring to and given by our constitution, referrs to individuals of the human species. Sperm has live cells but is not an individual human life."

where do you get that our constitution says anything about individual human life? can you cite something specific on this? besides, you cant deny the fact that you choose to ignore life prior, which is most definitely there and human. regardless, the process to define the eventual unborn individuals can take days or even weeks; conception isnt really instantaneous, especially not the formation of individual unborn persons (twins for example).

the animal comparisons are going on a tangent, but theyre relevant to the qualities you value in life, to consider life worth saving. the hippo demonstrated compassion in the video, plus humans can be cruel as well.

humans relate to each other, thats why they feel human lives are more valuable. but this is purely subjective when you consider their nonchalance when ending other lives, or those of other humans as they see fit. the same thing happens with animals when they become pets, people dont want to see them come to harm, meanwhile millions of animals suffer daily being raised to die for consumption and most dont mind it. im no vegetarian (love meat), btw.

__________________
Remedial English - Rule #2:

Always check your answers against Google search results.

ss:

zygotes/embryos/fetuses arent responsive or conscious that early on. theyre not self aware, and you cant know that animals are not self aware. sperm are required for the natural formation of a human being - your "chance of developing into a human being" argument is just as applicable to a fetus thats incapable of survival outside of the uterus, both depend on specific circumstances.

the likelihood of criminals escaping is not that high, not when theyve murdered. besides, thats not really the point. if youre open to killing in one set of circumstances, your right to life argument goes out the window, unless youre referring to something constitutional, in which case your example on law breakers is inapplicable to the unborn.

"Slavery used to be legal too. Are you saying that people were entitled to own slaves when it was legal? You agree that they deserved the right to own slaves?"

i thought you were being figurative with "right" that time, as in legality. nevermind.

__________________
Remedial English - Rule #2:

Always check your answers against Google search results.

Amazing how pro-aborts think - inside the womb, not a live human being - outside the womb, a live human being. A profound difference, based on being relocated a distance of about one foot.

__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba"

Justabubba: "that would include everyone"

http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847

its not simply in and out, its viability.

regardless, one foot is a bigger gap than sperm to conception, which prolifers consider to be instantaneous, even though its not.

__________________
Remedial English - Rule #2:

Always check your answers against Google search results.