Yadda Yadda Yadda... Cicero is an argument looking for a place to happen.
Last time. ~Cicero " zygotes, the random clump of human cells that you claim are no different than a cancer tumor" ...Not my words, yours.
~Cicero "What I don't understand is your sudden legal protection of the clump of cells that you are so ready to terminate but not experiment on" ...No protection for a zygote, just the woman.
~Cicero "I don't understand your reasoning why a women doesn’t' have the legal choice to perform medical experimentation on the clump of cells?" ... she probably does.
~Cicero " I just don't understand WHY you believe medical experimentation for women on this random human tissue should be illegal. " ... for the 100th time, I oppose unnecessary experimentation on humans especially when there are alternatives.
~Cicero " After all Box, isn't a tumor and zygote the same? " ... Again, your words Cicero, not mine. Post what you want, but don't attribute it to me.
~Cicero " What if the woman has a family member with some genetic disease, and in the name of finding a cure, she chooses to experiment on this random clump of cells? Why is that not a choice? " ...It is.
Cicero~ "It seems to me, that in the mind of the person that can justify terminating a zygote based on the argument that it is a woman's right to choose, and a zygote isn't a human being but just a clump of cells, then should also agree that a woman can CHOOSE to do ANYTHING she wants to do with her body including medical experimentation on the random human cells that exist in the woman’s body after the male sperm fertilizes the female egg." ...Yup. That's how it seems to you.
Now, you have posted your views of my views. Totally distorted of course, but you are entitled to your reality. I've posted my views... Unless you have something of value to add??? So far, you haven't.
You took all that time, just to dodge the question again?
Well if it's any consolation to you...I'm glad to see that even though your personal justification for abortion is misguided and illogical for argument sake, I can see you at least to have some sort of personal moral compass and understand that experimenting on a zygote is completely insane. Even if you don't want to admit it for fear of losing the argument, but you oppose experimentation because of the unknown harmful affect experimentation would have on the potential human being.
You took all that time, just to dodge the question again?
Well if it's any consolation to you...I'm glad to see that even though your personal justification for abortion is misguided and illogical for argument sake, I can see you at least to have some sort of personal moral compass and understand that experimenting on a zygote is completely insane. Even if you don't want to admit it for fear of losing the argument, but you oppose experimentation because of the unknown harmful affect experimentation would have on the potential human being.
Cicero. At times people will misstate your view by mistake. You keep misstating my view to prove your point.
Experimentation on a zygote for reasonable medical research is acceptable in my view. You seem to have a problem understanding that point, even though I've stated it several times.
A separate issue (which you blend into one issue to fit your agenda), is my justification for abortion. By law, a woman's choice is up to her and her doctor.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Cicero. At times people will misstate your view by mistake. You keep misstating my view to prove your point.
Experimentation on a zygote for reasonable medical research is acceptable in my view. You seem to have a problem understanding that point, even though I've stated it several times.
Well I guess when you say "reasonable" medical research, it makes me question WHO decides what is reasonable? My personal interpretation of what reasonable means is, whatever lawmakers in government have determined "unreasonable" is, and therefore limit the woman’s choice. So what I am saying is, the way I understand it, you do agree that a woman's right to choose in the case of abortion, but also believe that right to choose could be limited, even on the clump of cells that is not a human being.
Well I guess when you say "reasonable" medical research, it makes me question WHO decides what is reasonable? My personal interpretation of what reasonable means is, whatever lawmakers in government have determined "unreasonable" is, and therefore limit the woman’s choice. So what I am saying is, the way I understand it, you do agree that a woman's right to choose in the case of abortion, but also believe that right to choose could be limited, even on the clump of cells that is not a human being.
"Who decides what's reasonable". Certainly not you or I.
"Safeguarding Healthy Research Subjects: Protecting Volunteers from Harm" (NY State Dept of Health)
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
'giving' the woman the 'power' over her own reproductive choices, allowing abortion(of which I agree), just pretends that a woman is just as powerful as a man.....
1. women take chemicals to prevent ovum from clinging 2. women use spermicide inside to prevent sperm from swimming 3. women can take a chemical that will stop the multiplying of cells and ejaculate them 4. women take in the condom
1. men sheath the penis on the outside 2. men have viagra
such delicious choices.....and remember for millenia, women have eaten plants and drank fluids to rid themselves of 'unwanted' pregnancies because 'the king' would have them sent away and shamed....so really,,,this isn't different
WE HAVE NOT COME A LONG WAY BABY AND WE ARE THE SAME
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
NO honey (Cissyero) how about you, are you padded or all wet?
The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is apt to spread discontent among those who are. ~ H.L. Mencken
Logged
