If I had to choose, I would rather my life be ended as a fetus so I can go find another body to live in, perhaps one with a mother whom would want me for a reason greater than guilt. A reason like love.
So no one can love an adopted child?
Please...your illogical emotive post is utterly pathetic.
Nothing has a soul. We simply live. A spider has as much life as you and I.
Your subjective belief..not a fact.
Facts are something that are divorced from your general understanding it seems.
A spider may well have a spider soul.
I guess you are one of these people who THINKS they understand science and nature...if you knew anything about the universe you would know to retain an open mind and not make subjective assumptions based on your lack of experience and knowledge.
It doesn't matter what it could become. It only matters what it is presently.
That is the problem with people like you isnt it?
You don't see the bigger picture.
A human life is a human life period, regardless of developmental stage or cognitive ability.
You remind me of Hitler in fact...he destroyed human beings he did not consider human too....perhaps you will meet him in Hell.....you could be lovers ;)
So are you saying it's okay to kill something that could potentionally be someone just like you? I can see how it isn't up to you to decide for anyone else, but do you believe that it's okay?
That is exactly what these inhuman murderous animals are saying.
;)
http://ds9.botanik.uni-bonn.de/zellbio/
I repeat for the benefit of the poster of this link.
PLANTS DO NOT POSSESS CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEMS.
You seem to have some difficulty accepting this simple premise...so please shove your link up your unscientific behind.
A brain is not a mind. They are separate. A mind is a brain with identity.
They respond to sounds and stimuli, they are not really aware. How could they be aware as we think of it when an infant is only starting to develop this aspect of mind?
Your mindless assumption.
Those societies apparently had little need to progress to the point of needing such technology. Remember that inventions come from need and priorities.
Actually the apparent lack of sub saharan technological and industrial progress is due mainly to environmental and ecological factors...such as the lack of the necessary foundations for urbanised civilization.
Including environmental stability, domesticatable animal and plant species, a favourable-for-agriculture continental axis (east west like europe and asia) and many other prerequisites.
Sub saharan Africa lacks many of these prerequisites and still does whilst Eurasia was and remains rich and fertile.
Hence why development was to be restricted to smaller egalatarian communities.
Other factors like the invention of steel and gunpowder had considerable impact accelerating technological development and vastly increasing the military strength and conquering abilities of Eurasian powers.
Sub saharan people are survivors, they had to be and still have to be in much of Africa sadly...this is reflected in their phenotypes...by comparison the white phenotype has had the luxury of relative safety and abundance of food to develop & support a greater number of long term strategists.
The oriental asian phenotype even more so.
Plants have systems which are alike our nervous system, merely simpler and with different purpose.
I repeat!
Plants do not have central nervous systems...foetuses do.
Brain waves have been recorded by EEG (electro- encephalograph) in the human embryo 40 days after fertilisation
http://www.spuc.org.uk/ethics/abortion/
A nervous system is required to feel, but without a proper mind, one in development it isn't feeling anything we might consider human.
Utter unsubstantiated nonsense.
Or Bullsh*t as you americans say.
Unless of course you know something most neurologists and other medical scientists do not?
A brain is not a mind. They are separate. A mind is a brain with identity.
They respond to sounds and stimuli, they are not really aware. How could they be aware as we think of it when an infant is only starting to develop this aspect of mind?
Some evidence please?
Otherwise LOL
In order to be sacred you need different DNA? I never understood that argument, quite frankly and I have heard it before... as if having unique DNA gives you consciousness and individuality.
In order to be 'sacred' or human you need to have human DNA.
In order to be a unique organism/lifeform (multicellular or unicellular) you need unique DNA or perhaps even RNA in the case of viruses.
Having a unique genome as does the foetus (and its identical twin(s) possibly) means that the foetus(es) is(are) a seperate biological entity(ies) from it's/their mother.
That is the crux of that argument...hope that clarifies.
Yes plants bacteria and other organisms effectively clone themselves in certain hermaphrodite self fertilizing or mitosis related situations...but even the clone will not have 100% of the parent DNA.
The laws of entropy and biolological mutation demand that...or evolution would never have occurred.
Every organism is unique...if only very slightly.
Foetuses do not grow into trees. I guess I better not care about them because only trees are sacred.
So trees are more important than human beings in your view?
Fair enough that explains your pro elective abortion stance.
How subjectively illogical.
Gays pose a threat to society. They have a much higher rate of sexually transmitted diseases, look it up. According to LA Times, homosexuals are 20 times more likely to use methamphetamine than heterosexuals. They have a much, much more active sexual past than heterosexuals AND...drum roll...the average gay marriage lasts 1.5 years. A YEAR AND A HALF! Think about that. blah blah blah...
What a crock of sh*t...
If the (assumedly reputable) adoption agency is happy that the gay couple in question are suitable to adopt then who gives a crap what the LA Times thinks about gays in general?
Your revolting bigotry reveals that you are simply a prejudiced individual with an axe to grind with homosexuals.
That is the real truth here...
Perhaps you are gay yourself...and cannot deal with it...dont worry that is common enough.
I am bisexual and it took me a while to accept that..so you are not alone. ;)
So in a historical sense, yes, your testes have cells which are animals (animals need not be multicellular) but which are evolved to be genetically identical and inter-dependent.
O dear...
You could argue that a human being is a composite of billions of animals working together...so what?
How does that prove that a foetus is no more special than a Plum?
A foetus is human...a Plum is not.
That is the crux...which you do not grokk...
Both are unfeeling. Both are unaware of existence. Both are composed of cells. Both have metabolism. Both are offspring of a parent (a fruit is cells around seeds).
Nonsense the foetus has a central nervous system fruit do not.
Secondly one is animal the other is plant.
I think you need some biology lessons lol.
Then you are bigoted against yourself. I think you need a hug. Everyone is a bigot about one thing or another. This business of calling everyone who disagrees with you a bigot is inherently hypocritical...get it?
I called you a bigot because you think gays shouldnt have kids...get it?
You are a bigot...I just despise bigots...they spread misery and death.
Hug me and you will lose limbs...
Plant cells are alive, by the standard definition. In theory you should be able to asexually propagate apple cells, too, and grow new trees. I have never done this, however, but as I understand it you convert the plant cell into a protoplast and place it in a regulated growth medium, like agar. The main difficulty I believe would be reversing the cellular differentiation so that the cell may show pluripotence.
Plant cells of a fruit are alive but they are not part of an independent & unique multicellular organism.
Fruits are not multicellular organisms, in the traditional scientific sense...they are a part of an organism...my testes are composed of living cells that respire and excrete but i do not consider them independant animals of their own right...
This is what you are saying effectively...that my testes are individual animals...
Now do you realise how illogical your absurd argument is?
