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

hide menu

internetzsoviet    

Rank #23867 on Comments
internetzsoviet Avatar Level 172 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Offline
Send mail to internetzsoviet Block internetzsoviet Invite internetzsoviet to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Steam Profile: Legion
Consoles Owned: Xbox 360, PC
Video Games Played: Halo, Mass Effect, WoT, BF3, Mount and Blade, Killing Floor
X-box Gamertag: ToughKiller Ham
Date Signed Up:8/19/2011
Last Login:7/26/2014
Location:San Diego
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#23867
Highest Content Rank:#27160
Highest Comment Rank:#10777
Content Thumbs: 14 total,  17 ,  3
Comment Thumbs: 736 total,  966 ,  230
Content Level Progress: 30.5% (18/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 50% (5/10)
Level 172 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk → Level 173 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Subscribers:0
Content Views:50
Total Comments Made:358
FJ Points:770

latest user's comments

#140 - Oh, I agree. Christianity as far as I care is harmless at this…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/08/2014 on Science Guy 0
User avatar #141 - YllekNayr (02/08/2014) [-]
eeeeeeeeeeehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh........................

It's much less harmful than Islam. There are still areas where it's a huge fucking problem. See some of the news headlines regarding African leaders in the past year.
#127 - Define "building laws around their religion".  [+] (3 new replies) 02/07/2014 on Science Guy 0
User avatar #128 - YllekNayr (02/07/2014) [-]
Rather than a definition, how about an example? Sharia.
User avatar #140 - internetzsoviet (02/08/2014) [-]
Oh, I agree. Christianity as far as I care is harmless at this point in time, but Islam is definitely not.
User avatar #141 - YllekNayr (02/08/2014) [-]
eeeeeeeeeeehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh........................

It's much less harmful than Islam. There are still areas where it's a huge fucking problem. See some of the news headlines regarding African leaders in the past year.
#125 - You do realize that religion is protected under the first amen…  [+] (5 new replies) 02/07/2014 on Science Guy 0
User avatar #126 - YllekNayr (02/07/2014) [-]
That has nothing to do with what I said.

And yes.
User avatar #127 - internetzsoviet (02/07/2014) [-]
Define "building laws around their religion".
User avatar #128 - YllekNayr (02/07/2014) [-]
Rather than a definition, how about an example? Sharia.
User avatar #140 - internetzsoviet (02/08/2014) [-]
Oh, I agree. Christianity as far as I care is harmless at this point in time, but Islam is definitely not.
User avatar #141 - YllekNayr (02/08/2014) [-]
eeeeeeeeeeehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh........................

It's much less harmful than Islam. There are still areas where it's a huge fucking problem. See some of the news headlines regarding African leaders in the past year.
#202 - Im not the only one it seems  [+] (1 new reply) 01/11/2014 on Swimming +1
User avatar #224 - razorlupus (01/11/2014) [-]
God dammit I love those pictures
#331 - May I inquire about your computer build? Im looking i…  [+] (2 new replies) 01/06/2014 on Skyrim comp 0
User avatar #354 - pokimone (01/06/2014) [-]
Oh, and a 700 watt PSU. I almost forgot.
User avatar #352 - pokimone (01/06/2014) [-]
Certainly! I'm running an MSI g45 gaming motherboard, 12 gigs of ripjaws RAM, a GTX 770 w/ 4 gb VRAM (special gigabyte one, I reccomend it for the extra cooling fan, and the extra 2 gb of VRAM, thats what you really want for modding, vram.) a standard 1 TB HDD (I think seagate if you need that info?) Intel i5 4670k overclocked to 4.2 ghz, a hyper 212 EVO direct contact CPU cooler (cheap, and the best CPU cooler you can get in my opinion), all inside a Coolermaster HAF XB case (not all cases can fit the EVO, this one works great, and the horizontal motherboard tray just makes me feel more comfortable with the weight of all that stuff.). I make some extra money on the side running heavily modded games on youtube, hence the gaming build. Overall, it cost me about $2500, but that was about 6 months ago, some of the stuff might be a little cheaper now.
#9 - >his location Swedish crack dealer?  [+] (1 new reply) 01/06/2014 on As if the answer was obvious +1
#12 - anonymous (01/06/2014) [-]
Hell, people try smuggling hundreds of kilos of it over to Norway so why not Sweden?
#45 - No the last line is correct. 01/02/2014 on Mom and Dad +2
#60 - Comment deleted  [+] (1 new reply) 12/30/2013 on help +15
#63 - loneranger Comment deleted by internetzsoviet
#58 - I was being sarcastic, because minorities (at least American o…  [+] (1 new reply) 12/29/2013 on The feels are coming.... 0
#99 - confusedasian (12/29/2013) [-]
Don't let that bother you. Your past Nazi history is exactly that. Your past. Don't let that define you, but don't hide that part away. If that makes sense.
#44 - You can be proud of your heritage so long as you aren't white …  [+] (5 new replies) 12/29/2013 on The feels are coming.... +5
User avatar #64 - iridium (12/29/2013) [-]
If you ask me, I don't think anyone should be proud of something just because they were born with it. That just puts certain people on a pedestal. Being born with something means that you you got it because the two people who fucked to conceive you passed on the DNA which caused you to be that way, or something happened to your development out of your control from within the womb.

Being glad or not glad with something you were born with is one thing, but feeling like you deserve respect for or that you accomplished anything just with being born a certain way just seems silly. Being proud of who you are should stem from what you have overcome and have done. Now obviously, the circumstances behind your birth can lead to you having to overcome certain adversities, but the pride should come from what actions that have been taken. "I'm proud because I was born with such and such and didn't let it stop me from being the best person I could be." for instance.

Also, I really don't think that anyone should ever be proud of themselves from something someone else has done that you had no impact or input on. That just annoys me.
#63 - iridium has deleted their comment.
#46 - confusedasian (12/29/2013) [-]
Why? There's nothing wrong with being white. There's bad in all as well as good in all. This goes for white people, Hispanics/ Latins Honestly, what the hell are you people? You get offended if called Hispanic, you get offended for being called Latin. Fuck dude. , black, or Asian.

Also, if you're implying that Germans should be ashamed of the whole Nazi thing, then well, it's not their greatest hour, but embracing your past can help shape your future to a better you. Your past history shouldn't define you, but your actions should. That doesn't mean you should hide your past. You learn from it instead of throwing your past away to rot in some closet.
User avatar #58 - internetzsoviet (12/29/2013) [-]
I was being sarcastic, because minorities (at least American ones) love to hate white people showing pride in themselves for whatever reason. Especially people of German descent such as myself who, based purely on statement, receive fascist salutes because people think its funny.
#99 - confusedasian (12/29/2013) [-]
Don't let that bother you. Your past Nazi history is exactly that. Your past. Don't let that define you, but don't hide that part away. If that makes sense.
#51 - French Knights were bull headed nimrods who almost singlehande… 12/29/2013 on insertoverusedfrancejokeint... +1
#62 - Thats not even close to a Leopard 2. It shows several times th… 12/18/2013 on I Like Turtles 0
#48 - Im pretty sure that isnt even a tank, it looks like the gunner…  [+] (3 new replies) 12/18/2013 on I Like Turtles 0
#54 - anonymous (12/18/2013) [-]
#62 - internetzsoviet (12/18/2013) [-]
Thats not even close to a Leopard 2. It shows several times that he is sitting in an IFV of some sort.
User avatar #49 - djequalizee (12/18/2013) [-]
Maybe, thought i remember him being a tank gunner.
#80 - Bismarck is rolling in his grave right now ;-; 12/03/2013 on friendship is magic 0
#391 - You're overlooking an obvious substrate to why they do this,… 12/02/2013 on My Affirmation 0
#219 - A lot of other groups protest without factual evidence, why do…  [+] (2 new replies) 12/02/2013 on My Affirmation 0
User avatar #223 - cupcakecrusader (12/02/2013) [-]
I'm not trying to ban those that "do not believe the norm", stop making me out to be a neo-nazi or something :\

All I'm saying is that throughout time, time and time and time and time and time again, the walls of history have been painted with various travesties of varies religions, big and small, crude and extensive, established or front.
Handing power to relegion has almost NEVER worked out well, and those where it did are debatable at best. They use the same old tired moral and ethical codes to justify protests based purely on "because our ten thousand year old book, which we claim to be only 4000 years, says it's right/wrong".

If a religious bodies comes and shows that GM crops devistates wildlife, as other factions did, they would be given a fair chance to speak as they wish. However, they march through, make a big to-do over the smallest issue, then when people get interested someone finds a way to stretch the facts to suit the story and they prop them up as doctrine.
User avatar #391 - internetzsoviet (12/02/2013) [-]
You're overlooking an obvious substrate to why they do this, and it is because their books are based on a deity or entity that we have no concrete and observable evidence to support. I honestly agree with your opinion that theocracies are not an effective means to govern a body of people but you can not remove a group's right to protest. The means to an end is often overlooked, but I agree that protesting and spreading false information is disgusting. Added to that is my extreme disgust for Islam, and my disrespect toward Judaism as well as Christianity (to a lesser extent, however).



#215 - Or, you know, Macedonia. If you don't know who Alexan… 12/02/2013 on My Affirmation +1
#621 - sheer*  [+] (1 new reply) 11/18/2013 on Dad hates My Little Pony +1
#649 - legendofbearo (11/18/2013) [-]
I cannot submit myself to an ungentlemanly scat-wagon of discomposed individuals who find it appealing to raise tension and discord for the sheer reason of not accommodating that specific fandom.

I do wish we could leave these fellows alone. There is plentiful bunch of irritation on the planet and within the internet. However what point is there in seeking out that and attacking it rather then avoiding it? Perhaps many people just find it easier to show their distaste for something rather then showing why they enjoy something else. Maybe some people just have little situations surrounding them so they proceed into anything available?

In the end it doesn't make a difference really, the internet is filled with people who don't care for much, and just want to vent their frustration.
#565 - *zygote In definition there is no difference. It is a huma… 11/08/2013 on Abortion Explained 0
#560 - 1) A fetus is indeed an offspring, as it is the biological res…  [+] (2 new replies) 11/08/2013 on Abortion Explained 0
User avatar #563 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
Then if I stick to your point 2), then what is the difference between a zigot and a fetus?

If we were to follow your logic, than there is no difference between the first two cells divided from the fertilized egg and a 8-month term unborn child.

... I think you can see the logical fallacy in that. A bunch of cells is NOT a person, not yet anyhow.
That's why I brought the 3-month term rule into discussion. Although I'm not sure when the first brain activities occur.

From my point of view, an undeveloped fetus is pretty close to a person in a vegetative state or in a coma. You might argue that it's human, but it's not really a person.
User avatar #565 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
*zygote
In definition there is no difference. It is a human offspring. While one is not a living, breathing baby, it is a human offspring with the potential for life. It has been brought forth into the physical world and is now subject to the judgement of others, including an irresponsible or unable mother, depending on the situation.

While I agree that a zygote is not a person, that is not the object of our discussion. The object of my disagreement with you is of your manner of refutation and disdain for understanding of the opposing side. Do not assume your position is worth more than the other, for neither are worth anything in an objective setting.

It's late and I have things to do. Please try to learn something from our discussion, but other than that, decent endeavors to you.
#545 - I don't think looking out for a potential life is exerting pow…  [+] (4 new replies) 11/08/2013 on Abortion Explained 0
User avatar #550 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
"because they know they can just kill the offspring that they so irresponsibly brought into the world"

1) A fetus is not an offspring
2) A fetus is most certainly not "brought into the world" yet.

As I said in another post, there is a 2nd reason behind the medical (first being the danger of it) rule that states that abortions can be performed up to the 3 months term: it's also when the fetus's heart starts to beat.
So in that case you can also talk about ethical barriers as well
User avatar #560 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
1) A fetus is indeed an offspring, as it is the biological result of the fertilization of an egg by a male sperm cell. An offspring in the early stages, but an offspring. To argue this is to go against biological fact.

2) A fetus has been brought into the world, as it has taken physical shape and is subject to physical maladies and care. It is separated from the world by less than several inches of human bio-matter. It has been brought into the world. Whether it is sentient, can feel pain, etc is another question.

I don't condone bringing an unwanted life into a world where it will not perform due to the irresponsibility of its mother, thus why I tend to agree that abortion is somewhat acceptable. However to blatantly deny medical and logical fact in several manners that you have severely undercuts your credibility on a matter that you wish to defend. You may want to consider re-evaluating your logical assertions when it comes to proving a point you strongly agree with.
User avatar #563 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
Then if I stick to your point 2), then what is the difference between a zigot and a fetus?

If we were to follow your logic, than there is no difference between the first two cells divided from the fertilized egg and a 8-month term unborn child.

... I think you can see the logical fallacy in that. A bunch of cells is NOT a person, not yet anyhow.
That's why I brought the 3-month term rule into discussion. Although I'm not sure when the first brain activities occur.

From my point of view, an undeveloped fetus is pretty close to a person in a vegetative state or in a coma. You might argue that it's human, but it's not really a person.
User avatar #565 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
*zygote
In definition there is no difference. It is a human offspring. While one is not a living, breathing baby, it is a human offspring with the potential for life. It has been brought forth into the physical world and is now subject to the judgement of others, including an irresponsible or unable mother, depending on the situation.

While I agree that a zygote is not a person, that is not the object of our discussion. The object of my disagreement with you is of your manner of refutation and disdain for understanding of the opposing side. Do not assume your position is worth more than the other, for neither are worth anything in an objective setting.

It's late and I have things to do. Please try to learn something from our discussion, but other than that, decent endeavors to you.
#523 - First off I don't think you know what subjective as a word mea…  [+] (6 new replies) 11/08/2013 on Abortion Explained 0
User avatar #537 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
I meant its subjective because so far only males have brought that idea into legal grounds. It's a way to exert power and control.

Sorry, haven't woken up completely and I can't make a truly cohesive and structured response to that
User avatar #545 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
I don't think looking out for a potential life is exerting power and control, I think their positions revolve more around preventing young women from becoming careless in their lives because they know they can just kill the offspring that they so irresponsibly brought into the world. The only exception I make to this is rape, incest, developmental disorders and if the woman's life is in danger.

And only men bringing that idea into legal grounds has nothing to do with it being subjective, it has to do with men being naturally more inclined to legislative positions in the government. When one's paycheck is for legislation of laws, they are obliged to create laws that are geared toward protecting their nation's civilians (though that statement doesn't always hold true).
User avatar #550 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
"because they know they can just kill the offspring that they so irresponsibly brought into the world"

1) A fetus is not an offspring
2) A fetus is most certainly not "brought into the world" yet.

As I said in another post, there is a 2nd reason behind the medical (first being the danger of it) rule that states that abortions can be performed up to the 3 months term: it's also when the fetus's heart starts to beat.
So in that case you can also talk about ethical barriers as well
User avatar #560 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
1) A fetus is indeed an offspring, as it is the biological result of the fertilization of an egg by a male sperm cell. An offspring in the early stages, but an offspring. To argue this is to go against biological fact.

2) A fetus has been brought into the world, as it has taken physical shape and is subject to physical maladies and care. It is separated from the world by less than several inches of human bio-matter. It has been brought into the world. Whether it is sentient, can feel pain, etc is another question.

I don't condone bringing an unwanted life into a world where it will not perform due to the irresponsibility of its mother, thus why I tend to agree that abortion is somewhat acceptable. However to blatantly deny medical and logical fact in several manners that you have severely undercuts your credibility on a matter that you wish to defend. You may want to consider re-evaluating your logical assertions when it comes to proving a point you strongly agree with.
User avatar #563 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
Then if I stick to your point 2), then what is the difference between a zigot and a fetus?

If we were to follow your logic, than there is no difference between the first two cells divided from the fertilized egg and a 8-month term unborn child.

... I think you can see the logical fallacy in that. A bunch of cells is NOT a person, not yet anyhow.
That's why I brought the 3-month term rule into discussion. Although I'm not sure when the first brain activities occur.

From my point of view, an undeveloped fetus is pretty close to a person in a vegetative state or in a coma. You might argue that it's human, but it's not really a person.
User avatar #565 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
*zygote
In definition there is no difference. It is a human offspring. While one is not a living, breathing baby, it is a human offspring with the potential for life. It has been brought forth into the physical world and is now subject to the judgement of others, including an irresponsible or unable mother, depending on the situation.

While I agree that a zygote is not a person, that is not the object of our discussion. The object of my disagreement with you is of your manner of refutation and disdain for understanding of the opposing side. Do not assume your position is worth more than the other, for neither are worth anything in an objective setting.

It's late and I have things to do. Please try to learn something from our discussion, but other than that, decent endeavors to you.
#517 - Comment deleted 11/08/2013 on Abortion Explained 0
#487 - There is room for subjectivity no matter your bias. There is n…  [+] (9 new replies) 11/08/2013 on Abortion Explained 0
#517 - internetzsoviet has deleted their comment.
User avatar #492 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
So the idea that men should have the right to say what a woman should do with her body & life is not subjective at all, is it?
User avatar #523 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
First off I don't think you know what subjective as a word means. Pick up a dictionary.

Secondly, seeing as even the women in legislation don't agree with you, I don't think your say hold much weight. Even though your question doesn't make much sense.
User avatar #537 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
I meant its subjective because so far only males have brought that idea into legal grounds. It's a way to exert power and control.

Sorry, haven't woken up completely and I can't make a truly cohesive and structured response to that
User avatar #545 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
I don't think looking out for a potential life is exerting power and control, I think their positions revolve more around preventing young women from becoming careless in their lives because they know they can just kill the offspring that they so irresponsibly brought into the world. The only exception I make to this is rape, incest, developmental disorders and if the woman's life is in danger.

And only men bringing that idea into legal grounds has nothing to do with it being subjective, it has to do with men being naturally more inclined to legislative positions in the government. When one's paycheck is for legislation of laws, they are obliged to create laws that are geared toward protecting their nation's civilians (though that statement doesn't always hold true).
User avatar #550 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
"because they know they can just kill the offspring that they so irresponsibly brought into the world"

1) A fetus is not an offspring
2) A fetus is most certainly not "brought into the world" yet.

As I said in another post, there is a 2nd reason behind the medical (first being the danger of it) rule that states that abortions can be performed up to the 3 months term: it's also when the fetus's heart starts to beat.
So in that case you can also talk about ethical barriers as well
User avatar #560 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
1) A fetus is indeed an offspring, as it is the biological result of the fertilization of an egg by a male sperm cell. An offspring in the early stages, but an offspring. To argue this is to go against biological fact.

2) A fetus has been brought into the world, as it has taken physical shape and is subject to physical maladies and care. It is separated from the world by less than several inches of human bio-matter. It has been brought into the world. Whether it is sentient, can feel pain, etc is another question.

I don't condone bringing an unwanted life into a world where it will not perform due to the irresponsibility of its mother, thus why I tend to agree that abortion is somewhat acceptable. However to blatantly deny medical and logical fact in several manners that you have severely undercuts your credibility on a matter that you wish to defend. You may want to consider re-evaluating your logical assertions when it comes to proving a point you strongly agree with.
User avatar #563 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
Then if I stick to your point 2), then what is the difference between a zigot and a fetus?

If we were to follow your logic, than there is no difference between the first two cells divided from the fertilized egg and a 8-month term unborn child.

... I think you can see the logical fallacy in that. A bunch of cells is NOT a person, not yet anyhow.
That's why I brought the 3-month term rule into discussion. Although I'm not sure when the first brain activities occur.

From my point of view, an undeveloped fetus is pretty close to a person in a vegetative state or in a coma. You might argue that it's human, but it's not really a person.
User avatar #565 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
*zygote
In definition there is no difference. It is a human offspring. While one is not a living, breathing baby, it is a human offspring with the potential for life. It has been brought forth into the physical world and is now subject to the judgement of others, including an irresponsible or unable mother, depending on the situation.

While I agree that a zygote is not a person, that is not the object of our discussion. The object of my disagreement with you is of your manner of refutation and disdain for understanding of the opposing side. Do not assume your position is worth more than the other, for neither are worth anything in an objective setting.

It's late and I have things to do. Please try to learn something from our discussion, but other than that, decent endeavors to you.
#449 - I also noticed you like TO USE THE CAPS LOCK A LOT. Which does…  [+] (11 new replies) 11/08/2013 on Abortion Explained 0
User avatar #454 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
"you should instead take into account that opinions are subjective"

What if I told you
That condemning a woman to 9 months of pregnancy that in which she was forced is fucked up, no matter how way you put it. No room for subjectiveness here.
User avatar #487 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
There is room for subjectivity no matter your bias. There is nothing you can do to make that false, no matter how hard you try.

Denying that is a logical fallacy and your argument loses weight when you do this.
#517 - internetzsoviet has deleted their comment.
User avatar #492 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
So the idea that men should have the right to say what a woman should do with her body & life is not subjective at all, is it?
User avatar #523 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
First off I don't think you know what subjective as a word means. Pick up a dictionary.

Secondly, seeing as even the women in legislation don't agree with you, I don't think your say hold much weight. Even though your question doesn't make much sense.
User avatar #537 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
I meant its subjective because so far only males have brought that idea into legal grounds. It's a way to exert power and control.

Sorry, haven't woken up completely and I can't make a truly cohesive and structured response to that
User avatar #545 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
I don't think looking out for a potential life is exerting power and control, I think their positions revolve more around preventing young women from becoming careless in their lives because they know they can just kill the offspring that they so irresponsibly brought into the world. The only exception I make to this is rape, incest, developmental disorders and if the woman's life is in danger.

And only men bringing that idea into legal grounds has nothing to do with it being subjective, it has to do with men being naturally more inclined to legislative positions in the government. When one's paycheck is for legislation of laws, they are obliged to create laws that are geared toward protecting their nation's civilians (though that statement doesn't always hold true).
User avatar #550 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
"because they know they can just kill the offspring that they so irresponsibly brought into the world"

1) A fetus is not an offspring
2) A fetus is most certainly not "brought into the world" yet.

As I said in another post, there is a 2nd reason behind the medical (first being the danger of it) rule that states that abortions can be performed up to the 3 months term: it's also when the fetus's heart starts to beat.
So in that case you can also talk about ethical barriers as well
User avatar #560 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
1) A fetus is indeed an offspring, as it is the biological result of the fertilization of an egg by a male sperm cell. An offspring in the early stages, but an offspring. To argue this is to go against biological fact.

2) A fetus has been brought into the world, as it has taken physical shape and is subject to physical maladies and care. It is separated from the world by less than several inches of human bio-matter. It has been brought into the world. Whether it is sentient, can feel pain, etc is another question.

I don't condone bringing an unwanted life into a world where it will not perform due to the irresponsibility of its mother, thus why I tend to agree that abortion is somewhat acceptable. However to blatantly deny medical and logical fact in several manners that you have severely undercuts your credibility on a matter that you wish to defend. You may want to consider re-evaluating your logical assertions when it comes to proving a point you strongly agree with.
User avatar #563 - tkfourtwoone (11/08/2013) [-]
Then if I stick to your point 2), then what is the difference between a zigot and a fetus?

If we were to follow your logic, than there is no difference between the first two cells divided from the fertilized egg and a 8-month term unborn child.

... I think you can see the logical fallacy in that. A bunch of cells is NOT a person, not yet anyhow.
That's why I brought the 3-month term rule into discussion. Although I'm not sure when the first brain activities occur.

From my point of view, an undeveloped fetus is pretty close to a person in a vegetative state or in a coma. You might argue that it's human, but it's not really a person.
User avatar #565 - internetzsoviet (11/08/2013) [-]
*zygote
In definition there is no difference. It is a human offspring. While one is not a living, breathing baby, it is a human offspring with the potential for life. It has been brought forth into the physical world and is now subject to the judgement of others, including an irresponsible or unable mother, depending on the situation.

While I agree that a zygote is not a person, that is not the object of our discussion. The object of my disagreement with you is of your manner of refutation and disdain for understanding of the opposing side. Do not assume your position is worth more than the other, for neither are worth anything in an objective setting.

It's late and I have things to do. Please try to learn something from our discussion, but other than that, decent endeavors to you.
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 1050 / Total items point value: 1450

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#1 - jillianesquire (01/13/2013) [-]
Fucking faggot
Fucking faggot
 Friends (0)