Rep. Norma Torres triggers Rep. Rob Woodall

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

I actually really hate this. Sex and the culture around it are a huge source of needless anger and anxiety in men (a lot of it outward facing but also much of it internalized) which leads not only to negative external behaviors like toxic masculinity but also to depression, self-confidence issues, etc. I very sincerely think that weaponizing it (or turning it into a cheap laugh) makes one a horrible feminist. "Haha you don't have sex" is a teenage locker room-level insult and it's so undignified for an adult, let alone a member of congress, try to use it to tease their opponent. It's something Trump would say.

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Really, dude? Does this really need to be about abortion? What the hell is wrong with you?

It's about this:

Women's rights should be able to be debated by the men who were elected to Congress to do so along with the women, just as heterosexual members should have the right to legislate on LGBT issues since it comes with the job. Never understood this talking point, despite being considerably leftist myself.

What this woman is saying is that men have no business in the abortion debate.  That's the point of this joke.

I may not vote for Trump.  I may change my mind on immigration and what should be done.  There are many issues on which I am not an ideologue, and where I am genuinely of two minds, or where I disagree with who I vote for but can live with the disagreement. 

Abortion isn't one of those issues.  It's an issue of where HUMAN life begins, and I'm not going to let up on that, because my belief that human life begins at conception.  You can't prove it doesn't, and logic dictates that it does.  And such human life is INNOCENT human life and DEPENDENT human life.  It requires the advocacy of those that can advocate to defend the rights that unborn human was endowed by his Creator with.

Maybe you need to take a step back and ask why you are so bent out of shape about my advocacy on this subject.  This Congresswoman's Tweet is an implication that, somehow, a male has no right to weigh in on the subject.  That's something that I view as, at best, a logical fallacy used to manipulate folks like me onto the sidelines on this moral issue.  I don't doubt the sincerity and good will of a good many pro-choice advocates, but I do consider this Congresswoman's Tweet as implying that, somehow, this issue is none of my business.  Needless to say, I don't accept that, and I will not bow out of the discussion on abortion, so long as abortion is legal in the United States.

My mistake, you are right. I was so taken aback by the crudeness of Torres's comment that I lost perspective of what it was about. I will edit the post.

[DrScholl]

We've heard the pro-life argument before, so there's no need to repeat it or make this thread all about abortion. The fact of the matter is there are a lot of these regressive laws have been passed by mostly male or exclusively male bodies. Men cannot lecture women about their healthcare (even when it comes to abortion) and act as if women shouldn't have a choice.

With that said there are several threads debating abortion and there isn't a need to rehash all of them here.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

We've heard the pro-life argument before, so there's no need to repeat it or make this thread all about abortion. The fact of the matter is there are a lot of these regressive laws have been passed by mostly male or exclusively male bodies. Men cannot lecture women about their healthcare (even when it comes to abortion) and act as if women shouldn't have a choice.

With that said there are several threads debating abortion and there isn't a need to rehash all of them here.

When people are insinuating, as this Congresswoman insinuates, that because I am not a female, I somehow have no business injecting myself into the abortion debate, I will enter the discussion, and I will remind people what it is about for me, and for innocent unborn human beings.

This thread IS about abortion, and about the right of persons to enter the debate, regardless of gender.  If you want the discussion to stop, lock your own thread.  Until then, I'm part of this discussion.

[DrScholl]

We've heard the pro-life argument before, so there's no need to repeat it or make this thread all about abortion. The fact of the matter is there are a lot of these regressive laws have been passed by mostly male or exclusively male bodies. Men cannot lecture women about their healthcare (even when it comes to abortion) and act as if women shouldn't have a choice.

With that said there are several threads debating abortion and there isn't a need to rehash all of them here.

When people are insinuating, as this Congresswoman insinuates, that because I am not a female, I somehow have no business injecting myself into the abortion debate, I will enter the discussion, and I will remind people what it is about for me, and for innocent unborn human beings.

This thread IS about abortion, and about the right of persons to enter the debate, regardless of gender.  If you want the discussion to stop, lock your own thread.  Until then, I'm part of this discussion.

You repeat the same thing all the time, so it's clear what your position is. Repeating the same thing over and over again will not make people agree with you. But if this makes you happy and give you joy, have at it.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Since the only thing her remarks have accomplished is give her 15 minutes of national fame, and it was entirely predictable that would be the case, I can see only one reason for her to have done that. I just wonder if she'll be able to launch the Torres 2020 presidential campaign in time to make the next set of debates.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Since the only thing her remarks have accomplished is give her 15 minutes of national fame, and it was entirely predictable that would be the case, I can see only one reason for her to have done that. I just wonder if she'll be able to launch the Torres 2020 presidential campaign in time to make the next set of debates.

Perhaps we can start a Torres 2020 thread.  With maps!

[HAnnA MArin County]

Rob Woodall sounds like a beta soy latte snowflake who needs to find a safe space. Thank ya Jesus he’ll be gone soon and the good people of Georgia’s 7th Congressional District will be sending Carolyn B to Congress in his place.

When you also trigger the blue avatar deplorables on Atlas, you’re obviously doing something right and a major FF.

[We Live in Black and White]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here.  

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

First of all, my 112 posts are my first 112 back as a legitimate user after my first account was banned almost eight years ago and I spent a long period under sock identities. You might remember Cactus Jack.

Second of all: lmao triggered

[ProudModerate2]

Women's rights should be able to be debated by the men who were elected to Congress to do so along with the women, just as heterosexual members should have the right to legislate on LGBT issues since it comes with the job. Never understood this talking point, despite being considerably leftist myself.

I have to agree with some of this.
And I do understand that women want more of a say (on this matter in particular), but was the "sex starved" part of her comment about men, really necessary?
It's just silly and unproductive (I admit I chuckled at her comment).

[Boobs]

looks like she accomplished what she set out to – it proves you don't need verbose oratory to get your point across.

[Indy Texas]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here.  

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here.  

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

A fertilized egg, growing and developing inside the womb, is a human being.

I assure you that these souls, in Heaven, will be ever with the Lord, worshipping Jesus for all eternity in His Glory, just as I will.  Christ's redemptive work on the Cross was for them as well as for you and I.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

"my friend"

Really? Can he at least say "colleague" to sound a little less fake?

The way Congresspeople so freely throw around the word "friend" makes me nauseous.

I wouldn't advise watching the House of Commons then, which is a calvacade of comments like "I respectfully put it to to the Right Honorable member for Hereford that he is a pompous incompetent idiot who everybody hates".

[Indy Texas]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here.  

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

A fertilized egg, growing and developing inside the womb, is a human being.

I assure you that these souls, in Heaven, will be ever with the Lord, worshipping Jesus for all eternity in His Glory, just as I will.  Christ's redemptive work on the Cross was for them as well as for you and I.

So the fertilized embryos in the lab aren't people, then?

But that contradicts your view that life begins at conception.

So does life not begin until implantation?

Which is it?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here.  

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Calm down. Your overly dramatic sermons are not needed in this thread and I'd appreciate it if you didn't post them in a thread I started.

A great way to prevent it would be to not start any threads.

[DrScholl]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here.  

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Calm down. Your overly dramatic sermons are not needed in this thread and I'd appreciate it if you didn't post them in a thread I started.

A great way to prevent it would be to not start any threads.

I rarely start threads. Anyway, the beef is really with Norma Torres, not me and all this overreaction over a funny comment is totally unnecessary. If you have that much of an issue donate to her Republican opponent.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here.  

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

A fertilized egg, growing and developing inside the womb, is a human being.

I assure you that these souls, in Heaven, will be ever with the Lord, worshipping Jesus for all eternity in His Glory, just as I will.  Christ's redemptive work on the Cross was for them as well as for you and I.

Must kill you to think of all the other unthinking cells that die every day as well. To be honest, I think humanity thinks far too highly of itself. Empirically speaking, one less human saves a lot of other lives, and the world, full of death, must be in balance with itself. Regardless, I assure you that if the right wants a culture war over this, then they can just dig their own graves and get to worshipping Jesus just a bit sooner, because your worldview will never win.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here. 

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

A fertilized egg, growing and developing inside the womb, is a human being.

I assure you that these souls, in Heaven, will be ever with the Lord, worshipping Jesus for all eternity in His Glory, just as I will.  Christ's redemptive work on the Cross was for them as well as for you and I.

Must kill you to think of all the other unthinking cells that die every day as well. To be honest, I think humanity thinks far too highly of itself. Empirically speaking, one less human saves a lot of other lives, and the world, full of death, must be in balance with itself. Regardless, I assure you that if the right wants a culture war over this, then they can just dig their own graves and get to worshipping Jesus just a bit sooner, because your worldview will never win.

are you okay?  you're kind of freaking me out here.  don't do anything drastic.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here. 

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

A fertilized egg, growing and developing inside the womb, is a human being.

I assure you that these souls, in Heaven, will be ever with the Lord, worshipping Jesus for all eternity in His Glory, just as I will.  Christ's redemptive work on the Cross was for them as well as for you and I.

Must kill you to think of all the other unthinking cells that die every day as well. To be honest, I think humanity thinks far too highly of itself. Empirically speaking, one less human saves a lot of other lives, and the world, full of death, must be in balance with itself. Regardless, I assure you that if the right wants a culture war over this, then they can just dig their own graves and get to worshipping Jesus just a bit sooner, because your worldview will never win.

are you okay?  you're kind of freaking me out here.  don't do anything drastic.

Absolutely. I reread that, and it seems creepy AF, but I find it odd how antropocentric so many Judeo-Christian worldviews are, and the notion that a clump of cells trumps any other societal concern is absurd. It is a worldview which fundamentally misunderstands human reproduction, sociology, and ecology. Fetuses are not humans, and are not holy, and I find it highly ironic that these sorts of people don't dedicate their concerns to the genuine issues that face our society today. One might as well preoccupy themselves in the defense of innocent flies which are routinely killed.

(Although I really do think modern society is somewhat absurd in it's view of death. For example, we really shouldn't be subsidizing the sorts of $100,000 treatments which extend lifespan by just a few months, and so on.)

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here. 

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

A fertilized egg, growing and developing inside the womb, is a human being.

I assure you that these souls, in Heaven, will be ever with the Lord, worshipping Jesus for all eternity in His Glory, just as I will.  Christ's redemptive work on the Cross was for them as well as for you and I.

Must kill you to think of all the other unthinking cells that die every day as well. To be honest, I think humanity thinks far too highly of itself. Empirically speaking, one less human saves a lot of other lives, and the world, full of death, must be in balance with itself. Regardless, I assure you that if the right wants a culture war over this, then they can just dig their own graves and get to worshipping Jesus just a bit sooner, because your worldview will never win.

are you okay?  you're kind of freaking me out here.  don't do anything drastic.

Absolutely. I reread that, and it seems creepy AF, but I find it odd how antropocentric so many Judeo-Christian worldviews are, and the notion that a clump of cells trumps any other societal concern is absurd. It is a worldview which fundamentally misunderstands human reproduction, sociology, and ecology. Fetuses are not humans, and are not holy, and I find it highly ironic that these sorts of people don't dedicate their concerns to the genuine issues that face our society today. One might as well preoccupy themselves in the defense of innocent flies which are routinely killed.

(Although I really do think modern society is somewhat absurd in it's view of death. For example, we really shouldn't be subsidizing the sorts of $100,000 treatments which extend lifespan by just a few months, and so on.)

Is there anything really wrong with being anthropocentric? I believe human life is superior to that of other organisms because we have more of a capacity to impact life and the world itself than say a mere amoeba. Besides, it is human nature to look out for our own and try to preserve life because it has inherent meaning in itself.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here. 

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

A fertilized egg, growing and developing inside the womb, is a human being.

I assure you that these souls, in Heaven, will be ever with the Lord, worshipping Jesus for all eternity in His Glory, just as I will.  Christ's redemptive work on the Cross was for them as well as for you and I.

Must kill you to think of all the other unthinking cells that die every day as well. To be honest, I think humanity thinks far too highly of itself. Empirically speaking, one less human saves a lot of other lives, and the world, full of death, must be in balance with itself. Regardless, I assure you that if the right wants a culture war over this, then they can just dig their own graves and get to worshipping Jesus just a bit sooner, because your worldview will never win.

are you okay?  you're kind of freaking me out here.  don't do anything drastic.

Absolutely. I reread that, and it seems creepy AF, but I find it odd how antropocentric so many Judeo-Christian worldviews are, and the notion that a clump of cells trumps any other societal concern is absurd. It is a worldview which fundamentally misunderstands human reproduction, sociology, and ecology. Fetuses are not humans, and are not holy, and I find it highly ironic that these sorts of people don't dedicate their concerns to the genuine issues that face our society today. One might as well preoccupy themselves in the defense of innocent flies which are routinely killed.

(Although I really do think modern society is somewhat absurd in it's view of death. For example, we really shouldn't be subsidizing the sorts of $100,000 treatments which extend lifespan by just a few months, and so on.)

Is there anything really wrong with being anthropocentric? I believe human life is superior to that of other organisms because we have more of a capacity to impact life and the world itself than say a mere amoeba. Besides, it is human nature to look out for our own and try to preserve life because it has inherent meaning in itself.

No, it makes perfect sense, but being that way to the extent that you think killing a few unthinking cells is more of an affront to God than a million other things people do every day is ridiculous.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here. 

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

A fertilized egg, growing and developing inside the womb, is a human being.

I assure you that these souls, in Heaven, will be ever with the Lord, worshipping Jesus for all eternity in His Glory, just as I will.  Christ's redemptive work on the Cross was for them as well as for you and I.

Must kill you to think of all the other unthinking cells that die every day as well. To be honest, I think humanity thinks far too highly of itself. Empirically speaking, one less human saves a lot of other lives, and the world, full of death, must be in balance with itself. Regardless, I assure you that if the right wants a culture war over this, then they can just dig their own graves and get to worshipping Jesus just a bit sooner, because your worldview will never win.

are you okay?  you're kind of freaking me out here.  don't do anything drastic.

Absolutely. I reread that, and it seems creepy AF, but I find it odd how antropocentric so many Judeo-Christian worldviews are, and the notion that a clump of cells trumps any other societal concern is absurd. It is a worldview which fundamentally misunderstands human reproduction, sociology, and ecology. Fetuses are not humans, and are not holy, and I find it highly ironic that these sorts of people don't dedicate their concerns to the genuine issues that face our society today. One might as well preoccupy themselves in the defense of innocent flies which are routinely killed.

(Although I really do think modern society is somewhat absurd in it's view of death. For example, we really shouldn't be subsidizing the sorts of $100,000 treatments which extend lifespan by just a few months, and so on.)

Obviously I disagree strongly (though maybe we should be nicer to flies too!)  Still I'm darkly fascinated by your line "Empirically speaking, one less human saves a lot of other lives, and the world, full of death, must be in balance with itself."  Seems a bit paradoxical.

[7,052,770]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here. 

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

A fertilized egg, growing and developing inside the womb, is a human being.

I assure you that these souls, in Heaven, will be ever with the Lord, worshipping Jesus for all eternity in His Glory, just as I will.  Christ's redemptive work on the Cross was for them as well as for you and I.

So the fertilized embryos in the lab aren't people, then?

But that contradicts your view that life begins at conception.

So does life not begin until implantation?

Which is it?

This is a really important question that needs to be answered. Fuzzy must clarify whether he believes personhood begins at fertilization or implantation (either term can be referred to as "conception").

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

And predictably, the sex-starved males of Atlas come out of the woodwork to defend Snowflake Robbie.

You and your 112 posts haven't been around long enough to say "predicably" around here. 

I defend innocent human life, which begins at conception, complete with a God-given soul.  That this woman cannot even acknowledge that this is, indeed, what it's about for those of us who do view abortion as the taking of an innocent human life, is how depraved she is.

Somewhere in your city, there is a lab full of fertilized embryos, some of which may be implanted in the uteruses of women trying to get pregnant, others which will likely sit there and "wither on the vine" or perhaps turn rotten after a power outage or lab worker error causes them to melt.

Are they also "God-given souls"? When they get thrown out, have they "died"? Why don't they get a funeral? When they go to Heaven, do they get to turn into "real" people or are they just doomed to remain as little tadpole-like creatures that squirm around and can't speak or think?

A fertilized egg, growing and developing inside the womb, is a human being.

I assure you that these souls, in Heaven, will be ever with the Lord, worshipping Jesus for all eternity in His Glory, just as I will.  Christ's redemptive work on the Cross was for them as well as for you and I.

So the fertilized embryos in the lab aren't people, then?

But that contradicts your view that life begins at conception.

So does life not begin until implantation?

Which is it?

This is a really important question that needs to be answered. Fuzzy must clarify whether he believes personhood begins at fertilization or implantation (either term can be referred to as "conception").

You're the Death Advocate.  I've expressed myself.  You tell me where YOU think human life begins, because if I'm wrong, no human being gets killed (in an abortion) but if you're wrong, human beings get killed.

You have a far greater obligation to specify what you believe because the consequences of your error are greater.

[7,052,770]

You're the Death Advocate.  I've expressed myself.  You tell me where YOU think human life begins, because if I'm wrong, no human being gets killed (in an abortion) but if you're wrong, human beings get killed.

You have a far greater obligation to specify what you believe because the consequences of your error are greater.

As usual your post is a total non sequitur. I've told you over and over and over where I think personhood begins - when the fetus is capable of and likely to survive long-term outside the womb. I would support an abortion ban after that point, excepting cases where the mother's life is in danger. So WTF is this "you must specify" nonsense when I've always specified and never have been in any way unclear. Are you trying to fuel the "Fuzzy is going senile" theory?

And while we're at it, why can't you just answer a simple question like "when do you believe personhood begins?" You've earlier stated/implied fertilization, and now in this thread, you've implied implantation. Thus, an inconsistency that should be cleared up. Either answer is "fine" - we just want to know what you believe so we don't mischaracterize it.