- Joined
- Sep 16, 2005
- Messages
- 5,623
- Reaction score
- 605
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
SEE #365. There is a difference between "a human" and "a human entity". Read #365 very carefully....Then you are claiming a mole is not a human?
SEE #365. There is a difference between "a human" and "a human entity". Read #365 very carefully....Then you are claiming a mole is not a human?
There is a difference between "a human" and "a human entity".
SEE #365. There is a difference between "a human" and "a human entity". Read #365 very carefully....So you are saying a mole is a human?
There is a difference between "a human" and "a human entity".
ACCURACY. Both you and a hydatidiform mole are human entities, but you are a person (also known as "a human being") because of your mind while the other isn't (lacks a mind). There are a lot of types of human entities in the world, but as far as science is concerned, only one type of human being (any human entity with a mind having at least the Objectively Measurable characteristics referenced elsewhere) --and only one type of human being as far as the Law is concerned (any human entity that gets born and continues to survive).Why are you talking about human entities?
Both you and a hydatidiform mole are human entities
DEPENDING ON YOUR DEFINITION OF "A HUMAN", a hydatidiform mole could be called "a mass of humans". Remember, each cell in it has the same DNA as an original zygote --and abortion opponents are very fond of claiming every zygote qualifies as "a human".But a mole is not a human.
As the OP proves once again, the truth about PP is that the freedom and rights hating right wing will continue to tell lies about PP no matter how many investigations prove that PP committed no wrongdoing because the freedom haters are despicable and immoral bigots...
DEPENDING ON YOUR DEFINITION OF "A HUMAN", a hydatidiform mole could be called "a mass of humans". Remember, each cell in it has the same DNA as an original zygote --and abortion opponents are very fond of claiming every zygote qualifies as "a human".
I should expand what I previously wrote about "accuracy". One of the words sometimes used to describe the unborn is "organism". Unfortunately, the definition of an organism includes the requirement of possessing an internal organization. A zygote qualifies as an organism. Every cell in your body that has complete DNA qualifies as an organism. But a morula, which begins to exist when a zygote starts dividing, and a blastocyst seeking to implant in a womb, and a successfully-implanted embryo, are NOT organized --the first two are simple masses of cells and the third is in the process of getting organized, but it is not actually organized until that process is done (at which time it now qualifies to be called "fetus" instead of "embryo"). And so I use the word "entity" partly because it is completely generic and can correctly be applied to any stage of human existence --including hydatidiform moles, which also are disorganized masses of cells (even though each of those cells still qualifies as an organism!, just as much "a human" as the original zygote).
....who must have their freedom and rights violated and taken away. Right? That sounds like where you're heading next.
Your hallucinations make it sound like a padded room is where you are heading
NOT AT ALL HOW I DESCRIBE MOST UNBORN HUMANS. For starters, I fully recognize they are alive. Next, when talking about a zygote, it fails to qualify as anything other than a single cell ("lump of cells" would be a Stupid Lie). Only the morula, blastocyst, and embryo stages can qualify as a "lump of cells", and it is only partly true for the embryo stage, since that is the stage in which the lump starts to get itself organized. The fetal stage, by far the longest-lasting stage prior to birth, begins when the organization process is finished, and so the phrase "lump of cells" cannot be correctly applied to the fetal stage."I can't wait to meet the nonliving expanding lump of cells in your tummy."