Which is why you’ve been bringing my damn box into it and making sly references to pleasure in thrusting into it. I tell you what. Please do try. You’ll live, but I’ll make damn certain you don’t enjoy it.
This baffles me – probably for the best.
You were not happy with this definition. That’s when I tried to mollify you and explain the difference between a fetus and a baby. I could see you didn’t understand or were not comfortable with the terminology, that a fetus and a baby were different things and tried to break it dwn into simpler concepts of something still being under construction.
I clearly said that a fetus and a baby aren’t the same thing. “A fetus is unborn. Once it’s born, it isn’t a fetus.”
A premature birth was your argument to say that a fetus is also a baby. I was trying to show that although it had been delivered, it was not a fully formed being.
But even premature fetuses as you would call them with an undeveloped organ are still classified as babies when the leave the womb, whether that be a Harlequin baby, a blue baby, etc.
You maintained then that even a car with no engine is still a functional car. God help you at a dealership is all I can say.
Odd. I actually typed, “Same as when I look at a car missing an engine. It’s a car, not a malformed mess of molecules that bears a superficial resemblance to a car.” I never mentioned functionality. When I see a junker on the side of the road, I call that a car. When I call that junker a car, I make no claims that it still drives. Same with a premature baby. I call it a baby. I make no claims about its health or bodily organs.
You started before then to bring my vagina into the equation. Obviously you weren’ty having enough fun before without the personal bits. The box. My box. Fun going in and out of my box.
Mmmm, the box is a metaphor for your vagina. Fear not, I don’t want to go anywhere near it – you don’t seem like my type. Nor do I want you to be unable to have an abortion (another thing that I stated earlier in the thread). Perhaps if you read what I’ve written, you wouldn’t be quite so antagonistic towards me and may find we actually agree on large portions of the issue. My quibble was with your definition of a born baby that may have a health ailment as a fetus. Period.
< Deleted by Self as even that’s too good for Issendorf>
I’m sure whatever it was, I’ve seen worse. Usually vial insults directed at me make me giggle. Please whisper it to me if you wouldn’t mind – one can always add more insults to one’s vocabulary.
EDIT: I don’t care that we disagree – I welcome it. But, don’t come on here, insult my intelligence, and use that as a crutch when someone doesn’t automatically agree with you by default. I see exactly where you are coming from, I just completely disagree with your definition of a fetus when you use development as the key qualifier when the important qualifier for me is the baby/fetus’ location in relation to the womb. I understand where you are coming from. You are smart enough to see where I am coming from. The question is whether or not you will accept that there are multiple rationale positions in relation to the issue.