WASaBubbleButt

I didn't like it because nothing looked nice on, no fun fat clothes. Sometimes it seemed as though the only clothes they had were Poly & Ester sisters with black and mega huge flowers all over the fabric. Gahhhhh.... Today I LOVE shopping. I can find cool stuff now vs. the mega flowers from before.

Looks like our mods came through again!!! However, I do question what name she'll come back as. :cry

See my sig link, it would apply to US docs or those out of the country. Yes!! Research!!

I don't remember where I heard about/read about pineapple juice, I know I bought some before I was banded to be ready for it. There is another cure for foaming. I swallow about 1/2-3/4 teaspoon of oil/vinegar based salad dressing. The vinegar stops the foaming and the oil makes it slide down sometimes. Doesn't work all the time but a good part of the time. Something like Italian dressing.

Nothing like when a 60 y/o male doctor with thick glasses and loud nose breathing has to fix that little erection problem....

What was that old old song... tiny bubbles??? Something like that? Use the same music and put "Stoma bubbles....." Or the Oscar Meyer weener song... Tiny bubbles, when I stoma spew I make tiny bubbles...

And science proved that theory wrong and now we know that the original theory was incorrect. People used to believe a fetus was a perfectly formed baby and science proved that wrong too. I have a book that is pro-slavery. It was written in the mid 1800s. Do you know what they base their rights to own slaves? The bible. The bible said it was okay and THAT is what they based their beliefs. Thank goodness for rational thinking and education! Sometimes we have to accept that religion isn't the ruler of the world and common sense often times takes over. Common sense says not to take a faith at face value and instead, learn about the facts.

No, it does not. That's why different terms are used. Have you ever heard a scientist refer to a newborn as a fetus? The terms are there for a reason. Before you were Christian then you wouldn't have believed in a soul so it wouldn't have been a *real* human being. Kinda like a canine pregnancy, right? Same difference?

Sure they do, IUD, BCPs, morning after pill, etc. unless you believe that prevention of implantation of a fertilized ova isn't abortion. However, I'm glad to see that if it is just a clump of cells THEN it is okay, a later stage of the same "person" is not okay. There isn't a bit of difference between 4 cells and an embryo for the sake of the point here. Neither have a thinking brain, a personality, an awareness of itself or its surroundings, ability to feel pain, nothing. Just a clump of cells.

I deleted my posts because the person in question shows that her account was suspended. YEA MODS!!

You forgot to mention blowing bubbles, really big slime bubbles.

When people send me every stupid thing they get in their own mailbox. My sister actually sent me a long email about a dog that saved NO less than 2000 people in 9/11. A dog, all by himself. And she believed this! When people send me things that are this stupid I now look it up at Snopes and send them a link showing them they are a dumbass.

BTW, regarding a black person vs. my scenario of a fetus with brain connections, etc. That is my personal opinion, I'm not trying to make laws out of it and force others to agree with me. So it isn't really a fallacy since I wasn't using it to push the topic. I was using it to explain my own personal feelings. But just as anyone else, my own opinions don't really mean diddly squat, what does matter is that nobody has proven yet when it is a human being other than at birth. I personally see it a bit sooner.

Probably not, it would depend on science. If science can prove it is a human being vs. an embryo, I might have a change of heart. We disagree. It's a potential future human being. Science and the law do not support your scenario. You are again basing things on personal opinion, not science. You are basing it on what you want to believe, you are writing circles around religion and that's where you mistake is. You are trying to prove religion correct and that just never works. That's why they call it faith vs. fact. That is not what I claimed. I claimed that those who are anti-abortion are usually basing their beliefs on their religion. And they are. They believe the soul enters at the moment of conception. Soul... that's a term based within religion. Those that don't believe a soul enters the body typically do not consider a clump of cells to be a human being. I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why your religion (something based on faith and not fact) should be crammed down the throats of those that don't agree or believe in your religion. Does that mean it is okay for someone else to come along with a belief of killing everyone over the age of 30 to force you to follow their beliefs? Oh? How many body parts does it have at 4 cells big? How about 100 cells large?

Are you saying that by sending all the extra food that you ate too much of to a starving child would not save their lives and prevent them from dying of starvation? I'm talking about existing children that already ARE human beings that already FEEL the pain of a slow death from starvation. So it's okay to allow someone else to starve to death while we eat enough calories for 3 or more people but an embryo deserves more of a shot at life than dying tiny defenseless children? Isn't it true that we could all be doing a lot more for existing people if we wanted to but for many reasons we simply don't? So what is the difference between us eating like a heifer and not giving all those gazillions of extra calories to those who need it and letting them die instead, vs. a mother killing her zygote? How are we any better? No, maybe you didn't kill anything, but you didn't do your part to save anyone either. Not when eating all that extra food that someone else actually needed for survival. It's EASY to sit back and point fingers at all the supposed wrongs of another. Sometimes it's not a bad thing to face facts and think about our own responsibilities in this world. I don't believe it is moral to kill a tiny defenseless baby either. That doesn't mean a zygote is the same thing.

According to your logic you could have sent a ton of extra food to a starving child. There are many throughout the world. Think of how many you could have saved vs. eating it yourself? Women who have abortions don't kill children either, they abort an embryo/fetus.

There are tons of children already in need of homes. Go sign up.

Right. Like a carrot. I wasn't debating "little one" I was referring to:

Rights as you refer are not handed out willy nilly. The fetus essentially has no rights where a human being does. It's not an opinion, it's a fact. That's why they can't sue to prevent from being aborted. Again, I have to remind everyone for my own sake that I am not pro-abortion. I don't like abortion, it makes me sad. I have never had one, don't expect I ever will, and I haven't and won't ever assist in an elective abortion. But my personal feelings and dislike of the whole thing doesn't trump the rights of the mother who is an actual person and fits the legal description of a human being.

The only reason I pointed it out is because that is something many atheists do say and believe. They are under the impression that in order to be an atheist one cannot believe in an afterlife, reincarnation, paranormal, etc.

Not quite. I am an atheist and I believe in an afterlife. The ONLY issue atheists all have in common is a lack of belief in a god/gods. Many assume and afterlife and Christianity go hand in hand and that's not true. HEAVEN and Christianity go hand in hand. Theism-With a God Atheism-Without a God Nothing in there about afterlifes, just a belief or lack of belief in a God(s). Raises hand. I'm not 100% sure that reincarnation exists, but I can see the possibility and in the end, it doesn't really matter to me. But I am not going to say it does not exist.

There is a good book that I really enjoyed because of the variety of information. "The Dark Side of Christian History" by Helen Ellerbe. I'd check out AddALL book search and price comparison and see if you can find a cheaper copy. Otherwise Amazon.com: Online Shopping for Electronics, Apparel, Computers, Books, DVDs & more has it.

I know how a mother feels about hearing her own child's heartbeat but that is a plea to emotions, a logical fallacy. I *feel* abortion is sad, that is based on emotion. That doesn't mean I have a right to change laws because something makes me feel sad or feel any which way. There is more to it, much more. Sure, science can be wrong. So can religion. Bottom line in my mind is that the plea to emotion has no place in a debate. So what do we rely upon? Your religion or my lack of religion? See what I mean?

Not exactly. According to a Latin dictionary it means: fetus fetus (1) -a -um (1) [pregnant; fruitful , fertile; teeming with, full of]. (2) [that has brought forth, newly delivered]. fetus (2) -us m. [the bringing forth or hatching of young]; of the soil , [bearing, producing]. Transf., [that which is brought forth; offspring, brood]; of plants, [fruit, produce, shoot]. Latin Word Lookup Since it can also mean a carrot, it's a stretch to say it is an unborn child.

Well, the law does not agree that a fetus is a human being, that's why they have no rights. Science does not support that a fetus is a human being, that's why it is called a fetus vs. a human being. There is a difference between human life and a human being. A kidney is human life, it is not a human being. A full term baby is a human being. For me personally, when there are connections between the brain and everything else, when the fetus begins to have a personality, can feel something... anything physically, then it becomes a human being. That is the difference between a human being and human life. The biggest problem I have with pro-lifers is that it is their religion that teaches them that it is a human being. Not science, not fact, but religion. So when you (general you not specific you) push your beliefs on others it is a belief in religion you are pushing on others. It would be exactly the same thing as if another religion were to come along and say that it is amoral to live beyond the age of 30 because the person has had their shot at life. Give room to those who haven't had a shot at God given life. Would you agree to this because that is their sincere and honest belief? Aren't you doing the same thing? Do you believe that at conception the embryo has a soul? Isn't that what makes it a human being vs. an embryo? What about those that don't share your belief that the embryo has a soul? They believe it is a clump of cells. Isn't it religion dictating your belief it is a baby vs. an embryo? Your religion (or anyone's religion) isn't based on fact, if it were you wouldn't need faith. True? I'm not making claims whether your religion is real to you or not, I'm saying it is based on faith that what you believe is true and correct. What about those that do not share your religion? Should they be forced to live by your beliefs or should you be forced to live by theirs?