Ben Carson: It was OK for me to do research on aborted fetuses

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-14-2015, 10:15 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Depends on what you mean by different. But yeah, they have conviction in their beliefs.

Not real sure what it has to do with the OP, but if we're focusing on me I guess there's a point.

It's not difficult to grasp, you're against the, "death of innocent lives", the anti-war protesters are against the, "death of innocent lives".   

[*bfine32*]

(08-14-2015, 11:49 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It's not difficult to grasp, you're against the, "death of innocent lives", the anti-war protesters are against the, "death of innocent lives".   

Perhaps more difficult than you might assume from your couch. Extreme measures are taken to ensure innocent lives are not lost in the modern day combat environment.
 
Unless extreme measures are taken to prevent loss of life during abortions, not sure I see the comparison.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-14-2015, 11:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Perhaps more difficult than you might assume from your couch. Extreme measures are taken to ensure innocent lives are not lost in the modern day combat environment.

Aww, the couch general argument.  I realize this, but innocent lives are still lost. 
 

Quote:Unless extreme measures are taken to prevent loss of life during abortions, not sure I see the comparison.  

Extreme?  Does using normal birth control count as extreme?  In combat situations do mistakes still happen despite "extreme" measures?  If so, you must certainly give a civilian not operating under "extreme measures" more allowance for a mistake.  Please educate us as to your semantic argument on this subject.

[*bfine32*]

(08-15-2015, 12:04 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Aww, the couch general argument.  I realize this, but innocent lives are still lost. 
 

Extreme?  Does using normal birth control count as extreme?  In combat situations do mistakes still happen despite "extreme" measures?  If so, you must certainly give a civilian not operating under "extreme measures" more allowance for a mistake.  Please educate us as to your semantic argument on this subject.

I would consider abstinence as extreme. Birth control is pretty much I'm gonna do what I want to do and hedge my bets against anything happening.

Of course mistakes are made in combat and innocent lives are lost; however, unlike abortion, we don't go back and kill the innocents if they escaped the first time.

Semantics aside, I hope you (and whoever "us" is) have been educated

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-15-2015, 12:15 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I would consider abstinence as extreme. Birth control is pretty much I'm gonna do what I want to do and hedge my bets against anything happening.

So a person with fire or car insurance is just hedging their bets? 

Quote:Of course mistakes are made in combat and innocent lives are lost; however, unlike abortion, we don't go back and kill the innocents if they escaped the first time.

I suppose this argument makes sense if you consider normal methods of birth control to be murder.  Do you?

Quote:Semantics aside, I hope you (and whoever "us" is) have been educated

By you?  I'm afraid not.  You've made no points that don't rely on hyperbole.  Maybe if you keep answering logical questions we'll get to the point of "education".

[*bfine32*]

(08-15-2015, 12:20 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: 1. So a person with fire or car insurance is just hedging their bets? 



2. I suppose this argument makes sense if you consider normal methods of birth control to be murder.  Do you?



3. By you?  I'm afraid not.  You've made no points that don't rely on hyperbole.  Maybe if you keep answering logical questions we'll get to the point of "education".

1. If they continue to play with matches or drive irresponsibly; yes. Didn't realize it was that difficult of a concept.

2. I do not. I also do not consider normal military operations murder.

3. Not sure of the hyperbole used. I can only answer logical questions if they are asked.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-15-2015, 12:31 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 1. If they continue to play with matches or drive irresponsibly; yes. Didn't realize it was that difficult of a concept.

It's not, hence my puzzlement over your confusion. 

Quote:2. I do not. I also do not consider normal military operations murder.

I concur, agreement!!!  Unfortunately it renders some previous statement by you nonsensical at best.

Quote:3. Not sure of the hyperbole used. I can only answer logical questions if they are asked.

Feel the burn.  Given your posting history I assume you feel you've never been asked a logical question then. 

[StLucieBengal]

(08-14-2015, 11:00 AM)BonnieBengal Wrote: Here is his actual reply:  I wanted to use our time tonight to directly deal with an attack launched on me today by the left and the media. A couple questions came in on this subject, so I want to address it head on.

Today I was accused by the press as having done research on fetal tissue. It simply is not true. The study they distributed by an anonymous source was done in 1992. The study was about tumors. I won’t bore you with the science. There were four doctors' names on the study. One was mine. I spent my life studying brain tumors and removing them. My only involvement in this study was supplying tumors that I had removed from my patients. Those tissue samples were compared to other tissue samples under a microscope. Pathologists do this work to gain clues about tumors.
I, nor any of the doctors involved with this study, had anything to do with abortion or what Planned Parenthood has been doing. Research hospitals across the country have microscope slides of all kinds of tissue to compare and contrast. The fetal tissue that was viewed in this study by others was not collected for this study.
I am sickened by the attack that I, after having spent my entire life caring for children, had something to do with aborting a child and harvesting organs. My medical specialty is the human brain and even I am amazed at what it is capable of doing. Please know these attacks are pathetic attempts to blunt our progress.


That's his real response.  Not the one posted by the op.  


And I know why they attacked.  They attacked because Carson has been telling the truth about Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, and the fact that she was a racist who started Planned Parenthood in order to annihilate people she thought were inferior, especially African Americans.  

Glad to hear him address this.... More progressive shenanigans to besmirch a good man's reputation.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-14-2015, 11:18 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Pro-Choice folks know what they support is morally repugnant and will do whatever they can to make those that oppose it to appear hypocritical. It is why they insist on asking questions such as: “Including cases that involve incest or rape?” and why they will ignore the scientific fact that life begins at conception.

You are 150% correct.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-14-2015, 05:17 PM)BonnieBengal Wrote: The fact that Margaret Sanger was a racist is not just Ben Carson's opinion.  You can easily find her writings and read them yourself.

None of these guys think that... They all think she was the greatest person ever.

They are in constant denial of their support of eugenics and Sanger's beliefs.... They are just too afraid to actually admit they support negative eugenics like sanger.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-15-2015, 05:39 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: You are 150% correct.

LMAO!

Did you read the rest of the thread or do you just ignore points which don't fit your preconceived opinions?

Ben Carson is a liar and a hypocrite as I have already explained.

Are sperm and eggs cells alive or dead? It is a scientific fact they are alive. Therefore, it is a scientific fact life starts before conception. Do individual sperm and egg cells have individual rights? No.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-15-2015, 05:32 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Glad to hear him address this....  More progressive shenanigans to besmirch a good man's reputation.

By progressives do you mean people who know what honesty is?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-15-2015, 05:42 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: None of these guys think that... They all think she was the greatest person ever.    

They are in constant denial of their support of eugenics and Sanger's beliefs....  They are just too afraid to actually admit they support negative eugenics like sanger.

Wrong again.

[*bfine32*]

(08-15-2015, 09:50 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Are sperm and eggs cells alive or dead? It is a scientific fact they are alive. Therefore, it is a scientific fact life starts before conception. Do individual sperm and egg cells have individual rights?  No.

If left unmolested or unaltered can a sperm cell or an unfertilized egg grow into a newborn baby?

I am not sure what biology classes are required in your line of work, but it is a biological fact that life begins at conception. Baby Doctors goes back 2 weeks prior to this process to calculate stage of pregnancy

[Johnny Cupcakes]

(08-15-2015, 09:50 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Are sperm and eggs cells alive or dead? It is a scientific fact they are alive. Therefore, it is a scientific fact life starts before conception. Do individual sperm and egg cells have individual rights?  No.

Sperm and egg cells, although alive, do not have the ability to ever become a fully functioning adult human being on their own.  A fertilized egg contains 23 pairs of chromosomes, which is all of the information needed to map out 80+ years of human life.  The sperm and the egg need each other to obtain this information. 

[GMDino]

(08-14-2015, 07:52 PM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: Like I said before, if it can be shown that he somehow encouraged more abortions to make more money on research, that would certainly be a red flag. 

Knowing what we know to this point, I think it's a perception issue more than anything else. 

I've been wrong before.  

No, simply agreeing that the research using fetal tissue was good or important is in direct opposition to his stance that it shouldn't be used at all.

He wants his cake and to eat it too.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-15-2015, 10:10 AM)bfine32 Wrote: If left unmolested or unaltered can a sperm cell or an unfertilized egg grow into a newborn baby?

To quote Marco Rubio, "It can't turn into a donkey."

A dead sperm cell can't fertilize an egg.  A dead egg can't be fertilized by a sperm.  None of the cells in your body can turn into a newborn baby, but that has no bearing upon whether the cells in your body are alive or dead.  Are the cells in your body dead?  No.  The cells in your body are alive.

Quote:I am not sure what biology classes are required in your line of work, but it is a biological fact that life begins at conception.

I have degrees in biology and physician assistant studies.  My line of work requires I be a subject matter expert.  I doubt your line of work requires intro to high school biology.  It is not a "biological fact life begins at conception."  As I have already pointed out, sperm and egg cells are already alive before conception, because if they were dead conception wouldn't occur.

Quote:Baby Doctors goes back 2 weeks prior to this process to calculate stage of pregnancy

I have already posted the pregnancy wheel which allows us to estimate the gestational age.  Gestational age begins the first day of the last menstrual cycle which is before conception. Thanks for making my point.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-14-2015, 10:15 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Depends on what you mean by different. But yeah, they have conviction in their beliefs.

Not real sure what it has to do with the OP, but if we're focusing on me I guess there's a point.

What did you think he meant by different?

[*bfine32*]

(08-15-2015, 11:04 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: To quote Marco Rubio, "It can't turn into a donkey."

A dead sperm cell can't fertilize an egg.  A dead egg can't be fertilized by a sperm.  None of the cells in your body can turn into a newborn baby, but that has no bearing upon whether the cells in your body are alive or dead.  Are the cells in your body dead?  No.  The cells in your body are alive.


I have degrees in biology and physician assistant studies.  My line of work requires I be a subject matter expert.  I doubt your line of work requires intro to high school biology.  It is not a "biological fact life begins at conception."  As I have already pointed out, sperm and egg cells are already alive before conception, because if they were dead conception wouldn't occur.


I have already posted the pregnancy wheel which allows us to estimate the gestational age.  Gestational age begins the last day of the last menstrual cycle which is before conception. Thanks for making my point.

2 things:

1. You can tout your credentials all you want, but that still doesn't change the fact that biologists recognize that life begins at conception. There may be an outlier or two, but they are generally not taken very seriously. Doctors use before conception to determine viability not to asert this is when life begins.

2. This thread has derailed from the OP and I accept a great deal of the blame. If anyone wishes to make points unrelated to the Ben Carson issue (wish admittedly seems quite embarrassing) I suggest they do so in the Rubio thread.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-15-2015, 05:42 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: None of these guys think that... They all think she was the greatest person ever.    

They are in constant denial of their support of eugenics and Sanger's beliefs....  They are just too afraid to actually admit they support negative eugenics like sanger.

Nobody cares, there's a huge difference.  Everyone who drives a Volkswagen is a huge Adolf Hitler fan, it's true.