NationStates

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:45 pm**

New haven america wrote:
Sundiata wrote:No, the statement I was responding to was, in principle, hypothetically true. That being said, I don't condone the mistreatment of anyone.

Except you're ok with slut shaming.

My friend, I'm not playing this game with you.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:47 pm**

Sundiata wrote:
New haven america wrote:Except you're ok with slut shaming.

My friend, I'm not playing this game with you.

Being OK with slut shaming isn't a game.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:47 pm**

Polding wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Words have meanings, and using a word incorrectly—either accidentally or in order to evoke an emotion that otherwise wouldn't be evoked in the event of using the correct word—should be avoided.

People have been calling unborn babies children for longer than I have been born, I’m not apologetic for not being annally precise.

But have people been calling unborn babies children for longer than you have been a baby?

That is the crux of this issue, really.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:48 pm**

What's the political views of the pre-birth demographic anyway?

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:49 pm**

The New California Republic wrote:
Sundiata wrote:My friend, I'm not playing this game with you.

Being OK with slut shaming isn't a game.

Neither is tolerating promiscuity.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:50 pm**

Sundiata wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Being OK with slut shaming isn't a game.

Neither is tolerating promiscuity.

I find this Christian obsession with what other people do in their bedrooms in their privacy seriously perverse.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:50 pm**

Sundiata wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Being OK with slut shaming isn't a game.

Neither is tolerating promiscuity.

As long as everyone involved is a consenting adult, it's none of my business what they get up to in their hanky panky time.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:50 pm**

Sundiata wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Being OK with slut shaming isn't a game.

Neither is tolerating promiscuity.

Whataboutism again.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:51 pm**

Polding wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Words have meanings, and using a word incorrectly—either accidentally or in order to evoke an emotion that otherwise wouldn't be evoked in the event of using the correct word—should be avoided.

People have been calling unborn babies children for longer than I have been born, I’m not apologetic for not being annally precise.

Appeal to tradition fallacy!

Yeah, and people have been going to war for longer than I've been born, doesn't make it right. That sentence isn't even correct and it's better than what you've posted.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:53 pm**

Sundiata wrote:
New haven america wrote:Except you're ok with slut shaming.

My friend, I'm not playing this game with you.

Gaslighting.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:53 pm**

Sundiata wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Being OK with slut shaming isn't a game.

Neither is tolerating promiscuity.

However wicked promiscuity might be, it is not as wicked as thinking you have the right to comment on and control other people's sex lives.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:53 pm**

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:What's the political views of the pre-birth demographic anyway?

The most important question.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:54 pm**

The New California Republic wrote:
Polding wrote:It does though.

Wrong. Children have been born. Fetuses that have not been born are not children. Abortion affects fetuses, not children. Ergo, your statement that Kat supports the murder of children is inaccurate.

Fetuses are human, the distinction that humans must be born to be human is entirely arbitrary (how does birth confer ‘human-ness’?). Ergo, Kat. believes that it is perfectly fine to murder humans in their infancy, which are called ‘babies’ and ‘children’ because most people aren’t anal-retentive and fetuses are so near children that they will be children if they weren’t aborted.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:57 pm**

Polding wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Wrong. Children have been born. Fetuses that have not been born are not children. Abortion affects fetuses, not children. Ergo, your statement that Kat supports the murder of children is inaccurate.

Fetuses are human, the distinction that humans must be born to be human is entirely arbitrary (how does birth confer ‘human-ness’?). Ergo, Kat. believes that it is perfectly fine to murder humans in their infancy, which are called ‘babies’ and ‘children’ because most people aren’t anal-retentive and fetuses are so near children that they will be children if they weren’t aborted.

You're skin cells are human too.

So anytime you take a bath or shower you're committing genocide by allowed your skin cells to fall off your body.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:58 pm**

New haven america wrote:
Polding wrote:Fetuses are human, the distinction that humans must be born to be human is entirely arbitrary (how does birth confer ‘human-ness’?). Ergo, Kat. believes that it is perfectly fine to murder humans in their infancy, which are called ‘babies’ and ‘children’ because most people aren’t anal-retentive and fetuses are so near children that they will be children if they weren’t aborted.

You're skin cells are human too.

So anytime you take a bath or shower you're committing genocide by allowed your skin cells to fall off your body.

Fortunately, skin cells don’t develop into babies.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:58 pm**

Polding wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Wrong. Children have been born. Fetuses that have not been born are not children. Abortion affects fetuses, not children. Ergo, your statement that Kat supports the murder of children is inaccurate.

Fetuses are human, the distinction that humans must be born to be human is entirely arbitrary (how does birth confer ‘human-ness’?). Ergo, Kat. believes that it is perfectly fine to murder humans in their infancy, which are called ‘babies’ and ‘children’ because most people aren’t anal-retentive and fetuses are so near children that they will be children if they weren’t aborted.

Not arbitrary at all. It's a rather important part of the legal definition.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:58 pm**

Polding wrote:
New haven america wrote:You're skin cells are human too.

So anytime you take a bath or shower you're committing genocide by allowed your skin cells to fall off your body.

Fortunately, skin cells don’t develop into babies.

Actually, any cell in the human body can.

So yes they are and by your own logic you are henceforth a murderer.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:59 pm**

New haven america wrote:
Polding wrote:Fortunately, skin cells don’t develop into babies.

Actually, any cell in the human body can.

So yes they are and by your own logic you are henceforth a murderer.

Well, any nucleic cell. But yes, scratching your nose is genocide.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 7:00 pm**

Polding wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Wrong. Children have been born. Fetuses that have not been born are not children. Abortion affects fetuses, not children. Ergo, your statement that Kat supports the murder of children is inaccurate.

Fetuses are human, the distinction that humans must be born to be human is entirely arbitrary (how does birth confer ‘human-ness’?).

It doesn't, and no one is arguing that. What is at debate is what makes a human being.

Ergo, Kat. believes that it is perfectly fine to murder humans in their infancy, which are called ‘babies’ and ‘children’ because most people aren’t anal-retentive and fetuses are so near children that they will be children if they weren’t aborted.

A seed is so near a flower that it would be one if it was planted, yet I doubt you'll find many people who peddle bouquets of seeds.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 7:00 pm**

Polding wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Wrong. Children have been born. Fetuses that have not been born are not children. Abortion affects fetuses, not children. Ergo, your statement that Kat supports the murder of children is inaccurate.

Fetuses are human, the distinction that humans must be born to be human is entirely arbitrary (how does birth confer ‘human-ness’?). Ergo, Kat. believes that it is perfectly fine to murder humans in their infancy, which are called ‘babies’ and ‘children’ because most people aren’t anal-retentive and fetuses are so near children that they will be children if they weren’t aborted.

Infancy is not fetus stage though.

Because to be human is to be an independent life form, meaning outside of the womb.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 7:00 pm**

Neanderthaland wrote:
New haven america wrote:Actually, any cell in the human body can.

So yes they are and by your own logic you are henceforth a murderer.

Well, any nucleic cell. But yes, scratching your nose is genocide.

Gametes, with 23 chromosome pairs.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 7:01 pm**

Sundiata wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Being OK with slut shaming isn't a game.

Neither is tolerating promiscuity.

You still have yet to explain what the big deal about that is.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 7:01 pm**

Neanderthaland wrote:
New haven america wrote:Actually, any cell in the human body can.

So yes they are and by your own logic you are henceforth a murderer.

Well, any nucleic cell. But yes, scratching your nose is genocide.

Not to mention that anytime certain bodily events occur, vast numbers of potential humans are extinguished.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 7:02 pm**

Albrenia wrote:
Neanderthaland wrote:Well, any nucleic cell. But yes, scratching your nose is genocide.

Not to mention that anytime certain bodily events occur, vast numbers of potential humans are extinguished.

Periods are quite literally bloody murder.

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2020 7:02 pm**

Farnhamia wrote:
Neanderthaland wrote:Well, any nucleic cell. But yes, scratching your nose is genocide.

Gametes, with 23 chromosome pairs.

Erm... if they have 23 chromosome pairs they're not gametes.

NationStates

Abortion Law Reform Passes in New Zealand