xxovercastxx US

Member Profile

Birthdate: November 22nd, 1978 (46 years old)

Member Since: February 23, 2007
Last Power Points used: March 16, 2012
Available: now
Power Points at Recharge: 1   Get More Power Points Now!

Comments to xxovercastxx

pumkinandstorm says...

In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
You look suspiciously like an acquaintance of mine, but her name isn't Jen and she doesn't live in Canada. Then again, I have not seen or spoken to her in a few years so perhaps she has assumed a new identify.

Hmm... yes... Worry not, "Jen". Your secret identity is just between us.

Perhaps I am the acquaintance which you are referring to. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

ReverendTed says...

>> ^xxovercastxx:

Why is a heartbeat so important? Deer have heartbeats and yet, every fall, the forests are filled with armed Republicans.
Since we clearly only care about killing humans, if a line is to be drawn in the sand, then I say it needs to be on the basis of the development of a definitively human quality in the fetus.
I must have missed your comment earlier and wanted to reply, but the latest three replies in that thread were already mine, and the last one is, to me, the most important, so I figured I'd reply here.



I put the heartbeat comment in parentheses because it wasn't the point in itself, but illustrative of how quickly the fetus develops. After seeing my own developing children on an ultrasound, I can understand the reasoning behind the "mandatory pre-operative ultrasound" legislation a few states have instituted. I was very surprised by how quickly things go from "dark blob" to "vaguely humanoid" to "little person" and I suspect a non-trivial proportion of people seeking abortion may be as uninformed about it as I was. I was not at all expecting to hear their heartbeats when we did, which is why the heartbeat illustration carries weight with me.

I think your "line in the sand" is a perfectly rational approach. I disagree personally, but I can appreciate that you're taking a reasoned approach and I would be willing to accept it as a basis for legislation on the matter.
It gets problematic when we attempt to define "a definitively human quality". On one extreme, a human fetus is and will be a human fetus. On the other extreme, even newborns only look human, and exhibit few, if any, behaviors that distinguish them from primates. (Primate rights, or animal rights in general being another hot potato, tying in to the "only care about killing humans" sentiment.)

What, to you, would constitute a "definitively human quality"? Limbs? Beginning of neural development?
(This directly ties into what I think is that "most important question", so if you'd like to reply in the original thread, that's great.)

steroidg says...

I didn't know that. Thanks for the information mate .
In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
>> ^steroidg:

Cool as it is, the title of this video is an over statement. Not all snake venoms does that. My understanding of the subject is that by example hemotoxin produced by vipers destroys red blood cells which prevents blood clotting.


You're half right: not all venoms are coagulants. You're also right that vipers have hemotoxic venom.

But vipers and their hemotoxic venom are exactly the ones that often have this coagulant effect. Venom can be hemotoxic and still be either coagulant or anticoagulant. Neither is necessarily implied.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_venom#Some_effects

There's lots of non-venomous snakes that have anticoagulants, too. The bites aren't especially bad or painful, they just bleed like hell.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Member's Highest Rated Videos