You are a genocidal maniac.You don't get to choose who has the right to live or die.

I will say one thing...

Seems as though it's only the 13ers.

Well earned stereotype.

I'm confused here; you seriously still dont get it or you want me to justify obvious hyperbole with some sort of defensible position?

I'll help you out. Goto google, search "ar15.com: outofstep , lion, elephant." I say google because site search sucks.

The return will show you I have ZERO problems with managed game preserve hunts. As this certainly isnt the first time threads like this have come up.

Now, when a thread with a premise as fucking ridiculously hyperbolic as "Killing a fetus OK....Killing a lion Not OK" comes up. Anyone reading it should expect replies in kind. When someone ( a 13er of course) replied to my original post, thinking it was serious... Yeah, like I'm gonna let that low hanging fruit stay there...

Now, stop being a poster child for the 13ers.

Godamn...

A couple things for the "not a person" crowd to ignore...

On the person-hood debate a few pages back where the "vegetable on life-support" argument was used.  It is useful (for me) to consider first what would happen without our input.  I don't necessarily think that life support is immoral, but my wife and I are both against it for ourselves.  Without our input, 100% of pregnancies would (still) result in a human with its own DNA emerging from the woman's body in some state.

To address BES directly, I'm not sure why you believe that you get to choose whether or not the 2nd heart inside your body keeps beating.  Your post(s) lead me to believe that you think that up until the final moment that the baby leaves the mother, its still "trespassing" and is subject to the whims of the mother.  I was born about 3 weeks over-due, should my mom have been able at week 2 to decide "man this is taking forever, just kill it and get it over with"?  I have strong feelings about individual rights just like you do.  But I do believe that the government should take all steps necessary to protect the individual rights of those unable to do so for themselves.  The right of a mother to violate and steamroll the most important right of another individual (TO EXIST) is a false right.

Turns out this guy is dentist.....more reason to hate him.

You tripled down on stupid and morally questionable posts about your desire for culling the world, defended it heatedly multiple times, and explaining your position quite clearly. That others didn't take what you wrote as hyperbole doesn't mean they're stupid, it means you just were that convincing as you are a lunatic and an ass. If you're acting is that good, best look in the mirror to find the problem, Simple Jack.

I kind of pictured the guy being like Steve Martin in Little Shop of Horrors.

When you come into a thread titled "Killing a fetus OK....Killing a lion Not OK," and you take ANY post serious. It means exactly that.

Because your rights end where the rights of another begin?



The problem with that analogy is that a person does not die every time you own, possess, carry, use, etc, a firearm nor does anyone die should you own such property with out registering it with the state.

Every abortion that succeeds ends the life of a developing human being.



That person growing in a woman's belly, a person most likely put there via the conscious actions of the women herself, has a right to life.

Your "hyperbole" was so good I was sure you were a psychotic blowhard. Your defensive responses since convinced me you're definitely a blowhard and also confused about how hyperbole works, as its supposed to be obvious, which your posts certainly weren't.

You defended then with explanations that people calling you out never traveled overseas, that you have an issue with third worlders, and that you think idiocracy is going to happen. Your acting was so good in still pretty sure you're a horse's ass.

And you can drop the '13er bullshit, even '01er site staff called you out.

Quoted:
doesn't matter

It doesn’t matter in the slightest?  

So there is no functional difference between one of your non-functioning vestigial organs and a growing human being in the womb?

If the difference does not matter and they are effectively the same then why undertake ANY actions to remove the fetus?

Surely you are not planning on a surgical procedure to remove your appendix (assuming you still have one; if you lack an appendix substitute the word Coccyx in its place)?  I mean you don’t really need it and you don’t really use it and should it burst it could kill you.

The only other reason I can see to wanting to remove the fetus, apart from just not wanting it in your body (i.e. the non ruptured / inflamed appendix example), is the idea that the fetus, which is genetically human, will most likely grow into a more developed human being and then exit the body and then continue its development for the next 60 - 80 years.



Quoted:

and if they don't?

You call the local law enforcement or you take them to court and have them removed.   Circumstances arise where they may die rather than leave but that is an event reserved for the most extreme of circumstances and is certainly one not of your choice.

By law YOU the landlady exercise restraint and, in effect, allow your property rights to be temporarily trampled so the government may act to use their forces to forcibly remove the problem tenant.

Quoted:

it's not a baby, it doesn't even have an opinion on it. You can't attribute complex existential thoughts to a fetus.

True but then again I cannot necessarily attribute complex existential thoughts to young children under a certain age now can I?

Logically, your position applies as much to a new born child fresh out of the birth canal as it does a fetus.

Or have I missed something?


Quoted:

Furthermore, it would be ok to evict squatters at gun point if they refused to go.

That depends entirely upon the jurisdiction in which you live.   That would NOT be legal where I live.

Of course you may be able to do so lawfully where you live but you CANNOT make such a request of the developing child in the womb with an expectation that child will live.



Quoted:

Let me ask you this. Who has a right to tell the owner of the temple what to do with an embryo that lives in the temple? The state?



Yes.  The state may place certain restrictions upon rights in order to protect YOUR rights and MY rights and the rights of the UNBORN.

For example you have the right to keep and bear arms but not the right to walk to the local grocery store and shoot a person in the face for no reason at all.    

You may have the right to take a life with your constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms should circumstances warrant an occasion but not for any and every reason under the sun.

For the record if I had my way I would repeal all of 18 USC 921, 922, all of  18 USC Chapter 39 as well as the entirety of 26 USC.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/preamble

Quoted:
I can't? You let me swallow it your ring, you can't cut me open to retrieve it. You can't even keep me from moving to china. I think you lost your ring unless I choose to return it to you or poop it out or you can make a case to a judge that my upcoming stomach surgery is the perfect time to return it to you.


I agree completely however the flip side is you CANNOT just decide to cut open your stomach to remove my ring knowing that action will be destroying the ring in the process without my permission.

Surely you may elect to cut open your stomach as you please (it is your stomach) but the ring is still mine.   Destruction of my property could be a criminal offense or actionable tort.

Quoted:

As the caretaker of the fetus, I can kill it in order to terminate my pregnancy. I don't have to care for it it's whole life, I can give it up any time.

You can kill that child but that does not mean you should.

Likewise a struggling person could kill their infant child (much as the boyfriend of a woman did by placing the child in a microwave oven and turning it on) for a whole host of reason but that does not mean they should.

Caretaker is defined as:



http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/caretaker?s=t

I do not believe a person would be much of a caretaker for that child by killing it.    

However you are of course correct you do not have to care for it your whole life but there are people out there who are desperate to smother than child with love and affection who could and would allow that child to live.

Quoted:
Your conclusion is invalid because a fetus is not a child, a non-viable fetus is not a viable fetus or child and a child in the body is not equivalent to a child outside the body.


So when will the fetus become a child?   Is there some magical transformation that occurs moments before the baby exits the birth canal?   Does this change happen before or after birth?

I do not mean to belabor the point but I ask because that baby is just as much dependent upon its parents and guardians AFTER it is born as it was while it was growing in the womb.

After all we humans are helpless, pathetically cute things when we are born.

How the fuck is this thread not locked yet?

Ironic, isn't it?

https://youtu.be/ythrdCsOFJU?t=28s

People actually give this many fucks about an animal being hunted?

 
I've explained the differences in the stages of development quite a few times on arfcom, many times before you ever joined us 13er.




Some people still see the morning after pill as murder, by your standards (and mine btw) it would not be.  




The line when you start to give a shit about the nascent human being's rights is arbitrary.




fertilization


quickening


blastocyst


fetus


first breath


brain activity


heartbeat


viability




are just some of the various positions I've heard as to when that nascent human being should have a right to life.




everyone seems to have a different opinion from a moral standpoint.






I don't agree with abortion, but I'm also against the government interfering in a medical decision that should be between a woman, the prospective father, her doctor, and possibly her priest.




We've had this discussion on arfcom ad nauseum.   Whenever it pops up again, there is always some newbie who thinks he has a new perspective no one else has ever thought of and that everyone else isn't as educated on the subject as he is.  Congratulations 13er, this time you're that guy.   Congrats.










 

 
I think the stereotype exists BECAUSE so many 13ers are fucktards.


It makes the few normal ones stand out.

 
lucky that sumbitch wasn't a lawyer, they'd be stringing him up already

Ah.  Now you going for the ad-hominem approach.

Dude, you suck at making a point, and have got your panties in a bunch while making assumptions about what others think.

I was actually tiring up help you present a more coherent argument but I guess you lack the intellectual wherewithal to see that.  

I'm gonna leave you to trample all over your own dick.

I wonder if they'd be cool with it if he chopped him up and sold his organs and limbs as research materials

 
What villagers benefitted from this?  


They lured the cat out of it's protected area and killed it.


I hope this jackass serves a bunch of prison time and a huge ass fine.


Many of you guys call yourselves conservationists.  


This ain't like controlling the Deer population or whatever,  they are at the highest alert level for extinction.

So, to you conversations about genocide aren't considered hyperbole? Got it.



Nope, you're doing 13ers proud because you still dont fucking get it. No on else is still going. So yes, you're certainly wearing your 13er crown with pride. Jesus Christ son, I've directly said I wasn't serious, multiple times now... yet you still dont fucking get it. We all fucking get it already. You think I'm an ass; because you werent quick enough to pick up on the fact that ANYONE pretty much EVER suggesting genocide isnt going to be talking about it seriously.

Do you really need to say it again? "herp derp, but u dunn talked abouts it in a couple repleyes. hurrrrrrrrrrrr you are ams HITLERZSSZS!!!"  Yeah, no shit. If you're gonna be stupid enough to believe it, why wouldnt I keep replying? Is this your first godamned time on the internet?



Protip: This is a thread involving an animal. This is beekeeper. If you dont bath in animal blood daily, you're a dirty PETA troll. His reaction was pretty much expected.

Right on Bro!

Wellsaid.

So would you say it's canned hunting?


Basically the exact same way this lion was hunted?

That right there expresses that you want to kill a certain demograph of people (Third Worlders) and that constitutes genocide under the UN.  So yes, you actually fucking said that!

Why don't you go look this up and double check before you try calling other people stupid or 13er?

"Legally, its pretty simple.   Until he/she is born,  the mother has a right to terminate the pregnancy."

If the topic has been done as nauseum, why are you posting incorrect info still?

Great post!

ITT: gun owners argue over a procedure that the majority of them can't have done to themselves.

That's all fine and dandy, but it's still not any of MY business or MY problem. It's legal.  It most likely won't be changed.  There are far more pressing problems facing our country and OUR individual liberties.

Anyone who generally values an animal over a human life,  ESPECIALLY an innocent baby,  is an evil person.   Pure and simple.

Can we mourn Cecil without using his death to trumpet your anti-choice stance? No? Well, this is arf, after all.

Some choices should be illegal.  If your neighbor chooses to kill you, it should be illegal for them to carry out that choice.

Are you wearing all black today to mourn Cecil? Are you depressed, having trouble sleeping? Do you burst into tears when you watch Lion King?

It was a wild animal, that was a year away from the average expectancy for lions.

Really...belly

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/belly?s=t

Of course I meant the phrase to be a figure of speech so I am at a loss as to what you are actually tying to convey.




http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/figure%20of%20speech?s=t

Fixed it for you to add the context that should make the reason many of us argue over this procedure we "can't have done [on ourselves]" abundantly clear.

Some of us value life and especially the life of the innocent.

"Anti-choice?"  Isn't that quaint.

A person can choose to kill another person without just cause and for any reason under the sun.   I do not support that choice and if I may be presumptive, I would guess you would not support that choice either.

I believe a person ought to be able to decide to do or not to do anything they desire so long as those choices do not infringe upon the rights of others.

You want to wear white after Labor Day?  Fine by me.
You want to own and use hand grenades?   Let me know in advance and I'll bring BBQ.
You want to cut pieces of your own body off because you suddenly have the urge to do so?  Your body, your rules.

You want to deprive another human being of their life, liberty, or property?   No deal.  

I am NOT ANTI-CHOICE per se; I am pro choices that don't end the lives of innocent children.

I guess you don't Facebook? Everybody is an uproar over the planned parenthood video about a woman's right to choose and this idot that poached a lion and hunting is not OK.

Oh, my mistake.   It's not a developing human being.   It's a fetus.




http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fetus?s=t


My bad.

What I find outrageous is the same faggots who got into office through promises of defunding the ACA and securing our fucking borders are now making defunding planned parenthood their number one priority before recess.

How about a fucking budget?  How about curbing regulatory agencies fucking power to make laws without the consent of the Congress?  How about unfucking the NSA?  What the fuck about the very real threat of ISIS?


Fuck the RINOs and their pandering to the religious right, especially when they're ignoring everything thatis truly destroying this nation.

Cecil can't protect his pride, now that he's gone. Which means more lions - endangered animals - will die. It's not just about Cecil. Way to be a baby about this.

You do not appear to understand how our government works.

Republicans need a veto over ride in both the HoR and the US Senate to defund the PPACA (they have voted to repeal it and defund it DOZENS of times), to alter or abolish the NSA, or any of the other things on your list.

Feel free to show us the votes in both houses.   Remember, there aren't enough Republicans to over ride a Veto without Democrat support.

To their credit, Republicans have been successful in cutting the budgets of some major players.   I.e. the IRS has had their budget reduced at least twice and they may get further reductions.

Add to this mix that not all Republicans are the good guys and I am amazed the Republicans have been able to do what they have done given what they have to work with.