Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

badkidpetersen    

no avatar Level 0 Comments: Untouched account
Offline
Send mail to badkidpetersen Block badkidpetersen Invite badkidpetersen to be your friend
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:8/26/2011
Last Login:6/20/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Thumbs: 19 total,  35 ,  16
Content Level Progress: 6.77% (4/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 41.81% (23/55)
Level 0 Comments: Untouched account → Level 1 Comments: New Here
Subscribers:0
Total Comments Made:20
FJ Points:15

Show:
Sort by:
Order:

user favorites

latest user's comments

#148 - If valve was doing it right they would fix l4d2 for the xbox. … 07/25/2013 on Doing it right 0
#109 - Clearly you didnt watch microsofts conference. 06/11/2013 on How Sony won E3 0
#106 - I guess sony fans dont care about exclusives, seeing as theyre…  [+] (8 new replies) 06/11/2013 on How Sony won E3 -2
User avatar #234 - schneidend (06/12/2013) [-]
Destiny is the only exclusive PS4 needs.
#166 - anonymous (06/11/2013) [-]
> new
> Forza 5
> Dead Rising 3
> Halo 5

I'm sure every other game they're releasing will be 10/10 GOTY though.
User avatar #127 - osimonmagus (06/11/2013) [-]
Sony has more exclusive than the Xbox does release titles...
User avatar #119 - lockstin (06/11/2013) [-]
One of the main reasons ive always preferred PlayStation over Xbox is because not all of their top exclusives are shooters.
#112 - kez (06/11/2013) [-]
I'd rather 5 Exclusives i'd have time to play a year than 15 exclusives I wont play.

Play station has pretty much always had better exclusives.

Less of them, but better.
User avatar #107 - alphahacker (06/11/2013) [-]
what stuff is new and exiting for xbox? halo 5?
#109 - badkidpetersen (06/11/2013) [-]
Clearly you didnt watch microsofts conference.
#108 - riddles (06/11/2013) [-]
this ^
#139 - I disagree. I don't think of the fetus as part of the woman's… 11/15/2012 on SECESSION! +1
#94 - California's, "Fetal Murder law." However if you…  [+] (3 new replies) 11/14/2012 on SECESSION! 0
#95 - sacrilegious (11/14/2012) [-]
I don't disagree, I was just curious if this law was a real thing.
It sounded very rumor milly.
#97 - fact (11/14/2012) [-]
Nope. I thought it was federal, actually; we have it in Iowa.
#100 - sacrilegious (11/14/2012) [-]
Yeah, I did some poking, found it in Washington.
Huh, that's interesting.
My personal belief is that fetuses should never be aborted, but embryos are a different story. I don't think they're developed enough at that stage to be considered a human being yet.
#86 - Consider the following: If a drunk driver hits a pregnant …  [+] (10 new replies) 11/14/2012 on SECESSION! +1
User avatar #130 - thesoulless (11/14/2012) [-]
Imagine the "baby" in the womb. When the woman becomes pregnant, if she does not want to, or can not, for whatever reason, carry the child, she can abort the baby, bearing in mind that this would most likely take place early in the pregnancy, especially if the abortion was for non-medical reasons. Most elective abortions occur during the first trimester, while the first signs of disconnected neural activity begin to appear around week 17, 4 weeks into the second trimester, and sensory response doesn't begin until about week 21, therefore most abortions occur before the foetus could be considered concious.

The point is, the woman can decide whether or not she wants to carry through with the pregnancy, and up until a certain point, whether or not the foetus is a human being, in that it is actually alive, is questionable.

If a pregnant woman is killed, for example, by a truck, and the foetus dies with her, her death would be the end of one human life, and one potential human life. If the woman had decided to keep the child, as long as the foetus was alive, and past very early development, it could possibly be considered a human being, so long as it does not die on account of some sort of biological problem. Supposing that the woman did not actually want the child, and was able to have it aborted, and was killed between becoming pregnant and having the foetus aborted, the potential could still exist, although with such a small window of opportunity, one could imagine that the probability of such an event occurring would be fairly small, although it could possibly be argued against the second charge, if there was proof that the foetus was going to be aborted anyway.
User avatar #117 - MistaJesus (11/14/2012) [-]
It makes sense because the woman most likely did not wish for her baby to be suddenly killed. But if she wishes to abort the baby, she can. It's her body. No woman purposely gets hit by a car to cause a miscarriage.
#139 - badkidpetersen (11/15/2012) [-]
I disagree. I don't think of the fetus as part of the woman's body. I consider almost to be like a parasite (not literally of course.) Just because it's in your body, doesn't make it part of your body. The baby is as much the man's as it is the woman's at that point. That's just my view anyways. (bear in mind if the baby is killing the mother I think abortion is a necessary option. or in cases of rape/incest.) That's just my opinion anyways.
User avatar #115 - moooossseeee (11/14/2012) [-]
Coming from a Pro-choice Republican, here's my stance.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and their body is literally their body. We can't tell people what is best for them, that's morally ludicrous. Also, that calls into effect the whole "when does a fetus really become a baby" loophole, which is another argument in itself.

My personal belief is that abortion shouldn't be used as a crutch to get pregnant whenever with no consequences, but should be used as a responsible way of dealing with an unwanted pregnancy, rather than put the baby through the hell known as the American Adoption program.
User avatar #89 - Schwarzenegger (11/14/2012) [-]
It doesn't make sense. A human being is still a human being.
#88 - sacrilegious (11/14/2012) [-]
I've seen that, and it seems unlikely. Can you cite me that law?
#94 - badkidpetersen (11/14/2012) [-]
California's, "Fetal Murder law."
However if you disagree with me I'd enjoy to hear why. I am interested in hearing the other side of things. Coming from a biased school I never get to hear the pro choice side, so I'd like to change that.
#95 - sacrilegious (11/14/2012) [-]
I don't disagree, I was just curious if this law was a real thing.
It sounded very rumor milly.
#97 - fact (11/14/2012) [-]
Nope. I thought it was federal, actually; we have it in Iowa.
#100 - sacrilegious (11/14/2012) [-]
Yeah, I did some poking, found it in Washington.
Huh, that's interesting.
My personal belief is that fetuses should never be aborted, but embryos are a different story. I don't think they're developed enough at that stage to be considered a human being yet.
#75 - Omaha represent! 10/26/2012 on Good without god 0
#29 - Please put your hands together, for the ever failing one man s… 10/14/2012 on penguins 0
#12 - Agreed. I commented just because this picture applied to both… 10/10/2012 on So much this 0
#22 - Religion is ass. Faith, however, isn't all that bad. I found … 10/10/2012 on Religion - part 2 0
[ 19 Total ]
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 2050 / Total items point value: 2500

Comments(0):

 

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
No comments!
 Friends (0)