Disney Duster wrote:
A siamese twin must depend on the other to survive, yet killing one of them would be considered murder.
If you're speaking about Siamese twins who have been born, then those twins aren't in the mother's womb, they are not "parasites," using other people's terminology. So it's completely different, it'd be killing a really-for-real, born human.
Don't you see I've been saying I view fetuses that have come to a certain stage as being a really-for-real human? That's the point I'm making, that being attached to and depending on someone doesn't mean you aren't alive as Siamese twins prove. It doesn't matter if you're attached to another person in the womb or attached to another person outside a womb, it's all still being attached to and depending on another person to live but you are still a life that shouldn't be killed.
And this is getting off-topic, but what do you feel about pulling the plug on someone who is on life-support? Do you think that that's wrong, that someone who has been on life-support for years and it's so unlikely that their health will improve, should stay on life support, just in case?
When it comes to life-support, by that time someone should have been able to say if they wanted life support or not. If they didn't say how they feel on the matter, I believe the humane thing will always be to pull the plug after a certain period of time, perhaps after looking at statistics of how long it takes most people to come out of such things, and if it's too random, then I'd pull the plug pretty soon. And if the person is too young to have even thought of how they feel on the matter, then pulling the plug after the same amount of time is also what I feel is best. Since allowing a fetus to grow and live as it naturally, definately
will is quite different from someone on life support who might
live or might
not, I have such different stances.
According to the bible, a fetus is not a living person with a soul until after drawing its first breath.
That's actually a super-amazing revelation!
Please tell me why you believe that even after you read my response on it. Especially since the Bible never actually says a fetus is not a living person till after it breaths nor does it mention the word fetus that I know of.
Disney Duster wrote:
I think what we like about ourselves is what is not mistakes, and what we don't like is mistakes.
I've always liked you, DD, so I'm not picking on you whatsoever, but...
I'm short. Luckily, I'm fine with being short, but if I weren't, I could chalk it up to it being a mistake? A person has what everyone else would call psychological issues, and that person is a serial killer. He is fine with who he is, he doesn't think of it as a mistake, so that wouldn't be a mistake?
Thanks I always liked you too, who doesn't lol, but it's all about if you personally think it's a mistake or not. In the case of the serial killer, who is to say if the reason he is killing is because of genetic mistakes or his own personal will? That is getting into a very debatable subject right there.
Super Aurora wrote:
Except that they are under Transsexuals or Transgenderism. Otherwise they wouldn't be under that category would they?
I mean category as in "type"; in the sense of common features, appearance or behavior. Women belong to the "female" category. Are all women alike? No.
Yes but then you have women who have red hair and you have women who used to be men. It still can be a turn-off feature that will turn you off from as many women as you might be turned off by ones who had red hair or who smoke or who like Michael Bay movies or something.