Conks and Reproductive Rights, II

[Cap'n Cat]

Harassing minorities outside of Planned Parenthood.

Wrong. I encourage minorities to have abortions.

You know, Hen, I gotta tell ya, I'm-a gettin' that way, too, with the Somalis up here in Minnesota....

[andy7171]

You're cute when you're angry...

More disappointed than angry. I don't have a dog in this fight, hopefully never will.

This.

[D1B]

Nice red herring.

As long as the mother is carrying that kid, she should be able to do whatever the fuck she wants. It's her body and life.

Deal with it.

Deal with it.

[Ivytalk]

Wrong. I encourage minorities to have abortions.

You know, Hen, I gotta tell ya, I'm-a gettin' that way, too, with the Somalis up here in Minnesota....

Somalis are just one step removed from Norskies, you racist old Khundt!

[JohnStOnge]

As long as the mother is carrying that kid, she should be able to do whatever the **** she wants. It's her body and life.

No, it's her body, her life, and another life. That's why it's such an issue.

The problem is that those on your side are in denial with respect to the fact...and it is an objective fact...that there IS that other life.

[CitadelGrad]

Harassing minorities outside of Planned Parenthood.

Wrong. I encourage minorities to have abortions.

I would go beyond encouraging them. I would make it mandatory. Even better, I would mandate birth control implants from age 12.

[JohnStOnge]

I would go beyond encouraging them. I would make it mandatory. Even better, I would mandate birth control implants from age 12.

I didn't know you were in the Planned Parenthood organization. Margaret Sanger would be proud of you.

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.

[D1B]

As long as the mother is carrying that kid, she should be able to do whatever the **** she wants. It's her body and life.

No, it's her body, her life, and another life. That's why it's such an issue.

The problem is that those on your side are in denial with respect to the fact...and it is an objective fact...that there IS that other life.

Nope. As long as she's carrying it in her organs, it's a parasite, and therefore can and should be able to do what she wants.

Tough shit StMiSonge, deal with with it.

[JohnStOnge]

Nope. As long as she's carrying it in her organs, it's a parasite, and therefore can and should be able to do what she wants.

I suppose you could consider it a parasite in one sense we sometimes use such as when one person lives at the expense of the other. Kind of like somewhere around half of the population of the United States is composed of parasites who take more out of the system than they put into it.

But in terms of what a "parasite" is in biology it's not because it's the same species as its mother is.

And there is nothing more disgusting than a mother who wants to have her own progeny killed because its existence is inconvenient for her. This stuff of making it sound like women who get abortions are generally noble victims is nonsense. In the overwhelming majority of cases it's just women who had sex because they wanted to for their own purposes then want to escape any responsibility for their own actions. Selfish sluts. So selfish that they'll have their own flesh and blood killed because they'd prefer not to deal with them.

[JohnStOnge]

Below is a good discussion of the fallacy of calling a human embryo or fetus a "parasite" of its mother from a biologist. It's in the form of a response to a comment to a blog post she made (http://www.cephalopodiatrist.com/2012/1 ... sites.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). I'll quote the comment followed by her response. This thing of trying to justify a woman killing her own progeny by trying to make the unborn individual out to be "bad" because it's a "parasite" is nonsense. More intellectual dishonesty from the "left."

Nice explanation! However, it makes me wonder why biologists choose to stipulate that "by definition", a parasite must be of a different species than its host. It seems a little arbitrary. And species boundaries aren't always so clear-cut, are they? What about a baby mule?

Reply
Replies

lepid0pteraApril 19, 2014 at 9:31 AM
At its heart, parasitism is a relationship by which organisms have their reproductive success reduced by other organisms; and at its heart, reproduction fundamentally increases the reproductive success of an organism. In biological terms, classifying a reproductive relationship as a parasitism is fundamentally at odds by definition. The "species" in the definition is intended to help you make that distinction and is not at all arbitrary; the word parasitism was invented to describe a relationship between different species on an evolutionary time scale. There other intraspecific relationships on an ecological time scale that are combative, such as competition, and there are interspecfic combative relationships as well. So to use parasitism to describe any combative relationship on any time scale would dilute its explanatory power in biology significantly.

It's true that production of a mule probably hurts the mother's reproductive success. Not all reproduction increases reproductive success! The point is that reproduction evolved to, well, increase reproductive success. That some of these attempts at reproduction result in mules or kids with genetic disorders or stillborn children doesn't mean the process didn't evolve to contribute to reproductive success- just that it doesn't work well 100% of the time.

Meanwhile, parasitism exist as the result of one species evolving to take advantage of another species. Implicit in the concept of the parasite is that it evolved to take advantage of another species to increases its own reproductive success.

[BlueHen86]

Nope. As long as she's carrying it in her organs, it's a parasite, and therefore can and should be able to do what she wants.

I suppose you could consider it a parasite in one sense we sometimes use such as when one person lives at the expense of the other. Kind of like somewhere around half of the population of the United States is composed of parasites who take more out of the system than they put into it.

But in terms of what a "parasite" is in biology it's not because it's the same species as its mother is.

And there is nothing more disgusting than a mother who wants to have her own progeny killed because its existence is inconvenient for her. This stuff of making it sound like women who get abortions are generally noble victims is nonsense. In the overwhelming majority of cases it's just women who had sex because they wanted to for their own purposes then want to escape any responsibility for their own actions. Selfish sluts. So selfish that they'll have their own flesh and blood killed because they'd prefer not to deal with them.

Yeah there is, it's the asshole that tells the mother that she has to have the baby, but then calls her a parasite when she needs help raising it.

[JohnStOnge]

Yeah there is, it's the asshole that tells the mother that she has to have the baby, but then calls her a parasite when she needs help raising it.

You know, there is always the possibility of her not doing what creates the "risk" of becoming pregnant to begin with. Yes there are rape cases but we all know that's a very small percentage of the circumstances we're talking about. Most of the time it's a situation in which a woman makes a voluntary decision to have sex, gets pregnant, then doesn't want to deal with it.

Let's extend your point of view to children already born. Are you saying that if I say you are responsible for taking care of your own children I shouldn't say you can't kill them? Is that what you're saying?

You fuck, you create the possibility of becoming pregnant. You know that. You don't want to become pregnant, woman, keep your knees together and don't bend over. If you fuck voluntarily and get pregnant with a new life established don't come saying you want to kill another individual because its existence if inconvenient to you. YOU made the decision to spread your legs or bend over.

[BlueHen86]

Yeah there is, it's the asshole that tells the mother that she has to have the baby, but then calls her a parasite when she needs help raising it.

You know, there is always the possibility of her not doing what creates the "risk" of becoming pregnant to begin with. Yes there are rape cases but we all know that's a very small percentage of the circumstances we're talking about. Most of the time it's a situation in which a woman makes a voluntary decision to have sex, gets pregnant, then doesn't want to deal with it.

Let's extend your point of view to children already born. Are you saying that if I say you are responsible for taking care of your own children I shouldn't say you can't kill them? Is that what you're saying?

You fuck, you create the possibility of becoming pregnant. You know that. You don't want to become pregnant, woman, keep your knees together and don't bend over. If you fuck voluntarily and get pregnant with a new life established don't come saying you want to kill another individual because its existence if inconvenient to you. YOU made the decision to spread your legs or bend over.

People make mistakes all the time. You do it every time you post, yet somehow you expect others to be perfect.

[D1B]

Below is a good discussion of the fallacy of calling a human embryo or fetus a "parasite" of its mother from a biologist. It's in the form of a response to a comment to a blog post she made (http://www.cephalopodiatrist.com/2012/1 ... sites.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). I'll quote the comment followed by her response. This thing of trying to justify a woman killing her own progeny by trying to make the unborn individual out to be "bad" because it's a "parasite" is nonsense. More intellectual dishonesty from the "Ty left."

Nice explanation! However, it makes me wonder why biologists choose to stipulate that "by definition", a parasite must be of a different species than its host. It seems a little arbitrary. And species boundaries aren't always so clear-cut, are they? What about a baby mule?

Reply
Replies

lepid0pteraApril 19, 2014 at 9:31 AM
At its heart, parasitism is a relationship by which organisms have their reproductive success reduced by other organisms; and at its heart, reproduction fundamentally increases the reproductive success of an organism. In biological terms, classifying a reproductive relationship as a parasitism is fundamentally at odds by definition. The "species" in the definition is intended to help you make that distinction and is not at all arbitrary; the word parasitism was invented to describe a relationship between different species on an evolutionary time scale. There other intraspecific relationships on an ecological time scale that are combative, such as competition, and there are interspecfic combative relationships as well. So to use parasitism to describe any combative relationship on any time scale would dilute its explanatory power in biology significantly.

It's true that production of a mule probably hurts the mother's reproductive success. Not all reproduction increases reproductive success! The point is that reproduction evolved to, well, increase reproductive success. That some of these attempts at reproduction result in mules or kids with genetic disorders or stillborn children doesn't mean the process didn't evolve to contribute to reproductive success- just that it doesn't work well 100% of the time.

Meanwhile, parasitism exist as the result of one species evolving to take advantage of another species. Implicit in the concept of the parasite is that it evolved to take advantage of another species to increases its own reproductive success.

Blah, blah, blah...deal with it.

Women run the show when it comes to pregnancy.

[Pwns]

D, you realize you are on the fringe of this issue, right? Even most of batpoop liberal Europe doesn't allow abortion up until birth.

Right to life > convenience. Period.

[89Hen]

You know, there is always the possibility of her not doing what creates the "risk" of becoming pregnant to begin with. Yes there are rape cases but we all know that's a very small percentage of the circumstances we're talking about. Most of the time it's a situation in which a woman makes a voluntary decision to have sex, gets pregnant, then doesn't want to deal with it.

Let's extend your point of view to children already born. Are you saying that if I say you are responsible for taking care of your own children I shouldn't say you can't kill them? Is that what you're saying?

You fuck, you create the possibility of becoming pregnant. You know that. You don't want to become pregnant, woman, keep your knees together and don't bend over. If you fuck voluntarily and get pregnant with a new life established don't come saying you want to kill another individual because its existence if inconvenient to you. YOU made the decision to spread your legs or bend over.

People make mistakes all the time. You do it every time you post, yet somehow you expect others to be perfect.

JSO has you by the short hairs 86.

[Cap'n Cat]

D, you realize you are on the fringe of this issue, right? Even most of batpoop liberal Europe doesn't allow abortion up until birth.

Right to life > convenience. Period.

Stupid fucking clodhopper hillbilly...........

Whatever YOU do, don't reproduce and piss in the genepool, you Neanderfuck. We gotta look for another planet in a couple hundred years and we can't afford to have any mouth-breathing descendants of yours slowing shit down.

[OL FU]

D, you realize you are on the fringe of this issue, right? Even most of batpoop liberal Europe doesn't allow abortion up until birth.

Right to life > convenience. Period.

Stupid **** clodhopper hillbilly...........

:

If Turd gets a bottle stuck up someone's ass I wonder what clodhopper hillbilly gets you

[CID1990]

Stupid **** clodhopper hillbilly...........

:

If Turd gets a bottle stuck up someone's ass I wonder what clodhopper hillbilly gets you

well certainly not a bottle up the ass- thats an incentive

[D1B]

D, you realize you are on the fringe of this issue, right? Even most of batpoop liberal Europe doesn't allow abortion up until birth.

Right to life > convenience. Period.

Every liberal advocates for abortion, at any time, when the life of the motheris on jeopardy. Contrary to what your preacher tell you, other than the above, women are not interested in late term abortions.

[CID1990]

D, you realize you are on the fringe of this issue, right? Even most of batpoop liberal Europe doesn't allow abortion up until birth.

Right to life > convenience. Period.

Every liberal advocates for abortion, at any time, when the life of the motheris on jeopardy. Contrary to what your preacher tell you, other than the above, women are not interested in late term abortions.

so when Texas went to limit them to 20 weeks why did we have weeks of CNN and MSNBC coverage of the collective hissy fit, personified by miss pink shoes?

The left wants open access to abortion, all the time, any time

this is the left's capital punishment, only the ones dying are innocents. you cant even get a liberal politician to acknowledge that a human fetus is a person at all- in fact bring it up and they will change the subject to mother's welfare so fast you'll think Einstein was wrong about the speed of light

[Ivytalk]

Every liberal advocates for abortion, at any time, when the life of the motheris on jeopardy. Contrary to what your preacher tell you, other than the above, women are not interested in late term abortions.

you'll think Einstein was wrong about the speed of light

Actually, he was wrong: it's 693,000 miles per second.

[89Hen]

D, you realize you are on the fringe of this issue, right? Even most of batpoop liberal Europe doesn't allow abortion up until birth.

Right to life > convenience. Period.

Every liberal advocates for abortion, at any time, when the life of the motheris on jeopardy. Contrary to what your preacher tell you, other than the above, women are not interested in late term abortions.

Where is the exact line?

[D1B]

Every liberal advocates for abortion, at any time, when the life of the motheris on jeopardy. Contrary to what your preacher tell you, other than the above, women are not interested in late term abortions.

so when Texas went to limit them to 20 weeks why did we have weeks of CNN and MSNBC coverage of the collective hissy fit, personified by miss pink shoes?

The left wants open access to abortion, all the time, any time

this is the left's capital punishment, only the ones dying are innocents. you cant even get a liberal politician to acknowledge that a human fetus is a person at all- in fact bring it up and they will change the subject to mother's welfare so fast you'll think Einstein was wrong about the speed of light

Did the Texas law allow for abortion at any time if the mothers life was in jeopardy?

[D1B]

Every liberal advocates for abortion, at any time, when the life of the motheris on jeopardy. Contrary to what your preacher tell you, other than the above, women are not interested in late term abortions.

Where is the exact line?

Read my post and focus.