Things that made you laugh today (Political Version)

[Tgo01]

Oh so anything with cells that divide is legally alive.

Well now hold on there, buckaroo! Are you recognizing that a fetus is indeed a "life", just not "legally alive"? Is that a distinction you are now making?

[Neveragain]

Oh so anything with cells that divide is legally alive. So I guess we should be making chemotherapy illegal too since cancerous tumors have dividing cells. Also organ removal. Those have cell division too. Oh don't even get me started on elective surgery. I hope we have enough jail cells for all of these people.


Or we could be adults about this and acknowledge that when we say "life at conception", we are very obviously not talking about the definition of biological life. We're talking about personhood. Because if we *were* talking about the definition of biological life, then we would have to start throwing A LOT of people in jail.

So why don't you take another shot at this Mr "I got through 7th grade science class with a passing grade"

What do cancerous tumors and organs all have in common?

We can test their DNA and show that it is your cancer, your organ. We can literally match the DNA to your own unique set of DNA but it won't match your kids DNA.

I encourage you to continue equating a human being to cancer though, it highlights just how fucked in the head people like you are.

[Jeril]

Can men get pregnant?

I'll get your face pregnant!

[Shaps]

At this point, we should just Logan's Run this shit. That is the "new green deal" I propose.

[Seran]

What do cancerous tumors and organs all have in common?

We can test their DNA and show that it is your cancer, your organ. We can literally match the DNA to your own unique set of DNA but it won't match your kids DNA.

I encourage you to continue equating a human being to cancer though, it highlights just how fucked in the head people like you are.

Gonna be pretty amazing when they realize that the growth rate of cancer is indeed similar to gestation, only uncontrolled rather than systematic. Only one is often malignant and should always be cut out, the other is only occasionally malignant and of subjective benefit to allow growth. Either way its the choice of the owner to rid themselves of the growth

[Neveragain]

Gonna be pretty amazing when they realize that the growth rate of cancer is indeed similar to gestation, only uncontrolled rather than systematic. Only one is often malignant and should always be cut out, the other is only occasionally malignant and of subjective benefit to allow growth. Either way its the choice of the owner to rid themselves of the growth

[time4fun]

What do cancerous tumors and organs all have in common?

We can test their DNA and show that it is your cancer, your organ. We can literally match the DNA to your own unique set of DNA but it won't match your kids DNA.

I encourage you to continue equating a human being to cancer though, it highlights just how fucked in the head people like you are.

So a fetus would share 50% of its DNA with the mother, not 0%. Maybe you didn't actually get through 7th grade science...

To your point though, does that mean a fetus is only 50% alive? Oh and what exactly does that have to do with life beginning at conception again? Just because you can cite a difference between two things doesn't mean the difference is relevant. Because your patchy definition would also make multicellular fungal infections people with constitutional protections.

Finally, where is this evidence of scientific consensus that a fetus is alive in the sense that it would qualify for personhood, and where specifically does it say that the qualifications are "has cell division" and "shares no more than 50% of your DNA"?

Or are you just making things up at this point because you realize "science" does not have your back and that your whole idea of when personhood starts is an arbitrary belief that isn't based on actual facts?

[Neveragain]

Just because you can cite a difference between two things doesn't mean the difference is relevant.

I suppose in crazy town, which is obviously your zip code, the difference between cancer and a human being isn't relevant.

So a fetus would share 50% of its DNA with the mother, not 0%.

At least we can agree that it's not the woman's body.

[Neveragain]

Time4killingchildren as the prosecuting attorney in a murder case:

The Matlock moment "50% of the DNA matches the defenses mother, so it was 100% the mother that committed the murder."

[Suppressed Poet]

So a fetus would share 50% of its DNA with the mother, not 0%. Maybe you didn't actually get through 7th grade science...

To your point though, does that mean a fetus is only 50% alive? Oh and what exactly does that have to do with life beginning at conception again? Just because you can cite a difference between two things doesn't mean the difference is relevant. Because your patchy definition would also make multicellular fungal infections people with constitutional protections.

Finally, where is this evidence of scientific consensus that a fetus is alive in the sense that it would qualify for personhood, and where specifically does it say that the qualifications are "has cell division" and "shares no more than 50% of your DNA"?

Or are you just making things up at this point because you realize "science" does not have your back and that your whole idea of when personhood starts is an arbitrary belief that isn't based on actual facts?

I for one support a woman’s bodily autonomy and the privacy she has with her doctor.

…And I encourage you to speak with yours about your obvious premenstrual dysphoric disorder symptoms.