"The British magazine Nova ran a cover story in the spring of 1972 suggesting that test tube babies were ‘the biggest threat since the atom bomb’ and demanding that the public rein in the unpredictable scientists.”
One of the more extreme warnings was that babies so conceived would not even have souls. Ridiculous! But then again, looking around, are we so certain they were wrong?
Do dead humans exist? If human implies being; then at what point does one cease to be a human?
the main reason
Reasoning implies in response to something, so how could there be a main reason? Does reason represent cause or effect? Is there a conflict between cause vs effect?
Line (motion) generates boundary (momentum) for each thing within.
And that is what the debate is all about.
Debate equals reason equals conflict...whatever side one chooses perpetuates the conflict.
Abrahamics see the boundary line as natural conception...and natural departure...
a) suggested abrahamism (father of multitude) tempts one to ignore that nature (whole) sets itself apart (partial), hence whole to partial (inception); partial within whole (life) and partial to whole (death).
b) suggested "depart" (to be lost) tempts one to ignore being growth (life) within loss (inception towards death).
c) suggested "conception" tempts one to take and hold onto (concep) ongoing motion (tion), while ignoring to resist (growth) the temptation (loss) thereof. In-cep-tion implies being within received action, hence being the recipient free will of choice aka reaction.
life from moment sperm/egg fertilize new DNA expression
Try momentum instead of moment, and now instead of new and you'll get expression (growth) within impressing (loss).
natural cause death, not...
If nature implies cause of everything within; then "not, nothing" represents the choice of those within to ignore perceivable (natural) for suggested (artificial).
correctly define
Correct implies versus incorrect; hence an ongoing conflict of reason about a suggested definition (affixed meaning). Both sides holding onto the suggested definition as correct or incorrect; are ignoring to be form (life) within flow (inception towards death), hence solid within fluid...not affixed.
illegal
LEGAL (Latin lex; law) aka natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater). Suggested ILL; originates from EV-IL...the inversion of LIVE.
Others suggest laws to distract one from perceivable law...consenting to the former permits those suggesting to define (legal); redefine (illegal) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) laws at will. Perceivable law doesn't require ones consent; it forces adaptation (growth), while tempting ignorance (loss) from each ones free will of choice.
contraception
Aka reasoning against one another (contra) over received (cep) action (tion).
racists/gaytheists
a) -ist implies ones consent to suggested -ism. Others suggest -isms to collectivize (plural) ones (singular) consent, hence tempting one to ignore self for others.
b) RACE (Latin radix; radius; ray) implies ones growth outwards aka as center (life) within surrounding (inception towards death).
c) GAY (merry; airy; jovial; sportive; frolicksome; denotes more life and animation than cheerful) implies ones growth within animation (loss).
Only within sadness (inception towards death) can one be happy (life).
d) the-ism implies ones submission (by consent) to authority of another (by suggestion).
Pig-Latin (English) exchanged all perceivable connotations with suggested THE, hence the-ism. Example...the moon + the sun or la luna (female) + el sol (male) or der Mond (male) + die Sonne (female) etc.
false religion
RELIGION (Latin religio; to bind anew) implies binding oneself by consent to the suggestion of another. In this case...true or false implies ones consent to suggested definitionism. It doesn't matter if one chooses true of false; only that one consent to the suggested definition of another; because ones consents permits others to define; redefine and contradict the suggested at will.
Suggested religion (to bind anew) tempts one to ignore being "free" will of choice; bound within "dom"inance of balance aka free (life) within dom (inception towards death).
the discovery of technology
TECHNOL'OGY, noun (greek art, word or discourse) aka artificial (suggested) over natural (perceivable). Ones consent to suggested; while ignoring perceivable shapes ignorance into the cover, hence apart (dis) conceal (cover).
The goal of...
The few suggest progressivism to lure the consenting many towards outcomes; goals; achievements; trophies; resolution; fulfillment; purpose etc. Why? To distract one from being (living) within origin (process of dying); hence needing to resist wanted temptation.
Free will of choice implies response-ability, hence one being able to respond to perceivable origin (need), while struggling to resist the temptation of suggested outcomes (want).
having sex with
SEX (Latin seco; to divide)...natural order (inception towards death) generates internal/inherent division (life). Others suggest with (pluralism) as the inversion of being within (partial within whole).
One wants to "have sex" with others (temptation of lust); one needs to sustain self as sex (divided within whole) by intercourse through another for off-spring.
Off-spring implies apartheid within wholeness...not togetherness. Others suggest collectivism aka "we are family" aka FAMILY (domestics collectively) as the inversion thereof.
to keep slaves
Ones consent to the suggestions of another represents slave (consent) keeping hold of master (suggestion).
a) to understand implies ones choice to "stand under" another one, hence repressing self. Others tempt one to repress self (understanding), while ignoring to express self (comprehension).
b) can you give me a definition of "not; nothing; nothingness"?
c) does nature communicate itself through words? What are the requirements for shaping a word?
d) you wrote about murder (unlawful killing)...killing implies "deprive of life", while being alive implies being moved from inception towards death. That's nature depriving those within of life aka lawful killing.
How could there be unlawful killing; while being killed lawful?
a) -ist implies ones consent to a suggested -ism; which contradicts SCI'ENCE (Latin scientia, scio, to know)...suggestion contradicts perception if one consents to it.
b) only within whole (loss) can there be partials (growth).
Nothing human about it. It has been grown by an A.I.
If it developed into a humanoid. It isn't a human.
What use is that thing? Parts. Experiments. Slavery. It has no point. It will divide humanity. My forewarning is when they insert an automated brain, harvesting it like a cow is ethical.
It's a clone. How quick can they age it, is the next question. It won't be long before they're fully grown or given bionics.
I don't need a dumb bot explaining words. You aren't. I know the definitions. Synthetic, synthesised. Not human. So what if it's cells.
they're not...nothing about it...it isn't...it has no...it won't be...I don't...you aren't...not.
That's eight times using "nothing" as the foundation to define something. That represents the suggested embryo of nihilism germinating into ones ignorance of perceivable (everything) for suggested (nothing).
This represents a model of subversion by distracting partial (perception) from whole (perceivable) with a substitute (suggestion).
It has been grown by an A.I.
Ones consent to suggested represents INTELLIGENCE (Latin inteligo; to understand); hence one consenting to stand under another. ARTIFICIAL (artifice; fictitious; in opposition to natural) represents ones ignorance of natural (perceivable) for artificial (suggested).
In the aforementioned example of your behavior...you grew suggested nihilism (nothing) by perpetuating it eight times within a single response. That implies your consent (intelligence) and ignorance (artificial) aka AI.
will divide humanity
HUMAN (heb; form) implies divided through ANIMAL (animation), and will (want) implies divided within need...animation forms will.
My forewarning...
...represents suggested progressivism tempting others to ignore perceivable origin (reality) for suggested outcomes (fiction).
clone
CLONE; noun - "a transplanted part of one original"...aka whole (inception towards death) transmuting into partials (life). Clone implies status quo of being, yet being willingly ignores perceivable implication for suggested dualism aka duplication (cloning) and that implies being a DUPE; noun - "a deceived person".
I know the definitions
Knowledge implies perceiving everything moving: definition implies a suggestion of something affixed, and THE-ism implies ones submission to the authority of another one.
Definition (affixed) contradicts knowledge (moving). Nature doesn't define; it sets each one "free" (will of choice)...it's choice that can be tempted to choose to hold onto (affix) suggested definitions.
Synthetic, synthesised. Not human.
SYN'THESIS, noun -"composition; putting together"...being implies set (inception towards death) apart (life), while having the free will of choice to compose (as instrument aka instructed mind) within sound (entire; whole; everything perceivable).
Others suggest composition (collectivism) aka putting together...e pluribus unum (out of many; one) + tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together) + abrahamism (father of multitude) + miscegenation; mass migration; multiculturalism; melting pot + united states; united nations; european union; uniformity; university; universal basic income; unicode; one world system and so on.
So what if it's cells.
Free-dom aka "free" will of choice within "dom"-inance of balance...that represents the foundation for ones confined mind (confinement; cell; apartment aka partial mind; compartment etc).
Balance implies momentum (inception towards death) of motion for each ones choice (life) within. Others suggest organism to distract one from being ORGAN (instrument of action aka instrumental choice within enacting balance). Ones consent to suggested organism permits others to suggest CELL (Latin celare; to hide; conceal; cover), hence utilizing ones consensual ignorance as the cover to conceal perceivable underneath suggested.
This is fake news. Just like the cloned sheep.
Do you expect the truth from the bbc?
Also, I find it interesting that the "free-will-of-choice" bot is here to overspam this post. As if he is working for a certain outcome... :D
As a point of historical reference and an indication of just how far the Overton Window has shifted just within living memory, I remind everyone:
In Vitro Fertilization Was Once As Controversial As Gene Editing is Today: The scientists who pioneered it were regarded as pariahs, even within their own universities (Smithsonian Magazine 9/27/2017)
One of the more extreme warnings was that babies so conceived would not even have souls. Ridiculous! But then again, looking around, are we so certain they were wrong?
Pack that robot on a space ship and send it to the nearest habitable planet. Instant Colonization.
Do dead humans exist? If human implies being; then at what point does one cease to be a human?
Reasoning implies in response to something, so how could there be a main reason? Does reason represent cause or effect? Is there a conflict between cause vs effect?
Line (motion) generates boundary (momentum) for each thing within.
Debate equals reason equals conflict...whatever side one chooses perpetuates the conflict.
a) suggested abrahamism (father of multitude) tempts one to ignore that nature (whole) sets itself apart (partial), hence whole to partial (inception); partial within whole (life) and partial to whole (death).
b) suggested "depart" (to be lost) tempts one to ignore being growth (life) within loss (inception towards death).
c) suggested "conception" tempts one to take and hold onto (concep) ongoing motion (tion), while ignoring to resist (growth) the temptation (loss) thereof. In-cep-tion implies being within received action, hence being the recipient free will of choice aka reaction.
Try momentum instead of moment, and now instead of new and you'll get expression (growth) within impressing (loss).
If nature implies cause of everything within; then "not, nothing" represents the choice of those within to ignore perceivable (natural) for suggested (artificial).
Correct implies versus incorrect; hence an ongoing conflict of reason about a suggested definition (affixed meaning). Both sides holding onto the suggested definition as correct or incorrect; are ignoring to be form (life) within flow (inception towards death), hence solid within fluid...not affixed.
LEGAL (Latin lex; law) aka natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater). Suggested ILL; originates from EV-IL...the inversion of LIVE.
Others suggest laws to distract one from perceivable law...consenting to the former permits those suggesting to define (legal); redefine (illegal) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) laws at will. Perceivable law doesn't require ones consent; it forces adaptation (growth), while tempting ignorance (loss) from each ones free will of choice.
Aka reasoning against one another (contra) over received (cep) action (tion).
a) -ist implies ones consent to suggested -ism. Others suggest -isms to collectivize (plural) ones (singular) consent, hence tempting one to ignore self for others.
b) RACE (Latin radix; radius; ray) implies ones growth outwards aka as center (life) within surrounding (inception towards death).
c) GAY (merry; airy; jovial; sportive; frolicksome; denotes more life and animation than cheerful) implies ones growth within animation (loss).
Only within sadness (inception towards death) can one be happy (life).
d) the-ism implies ones submission (by consent) to authority of another (by suggestion).
Pig-Latin (English) exchanged all perceivable connotations with suggested THE, hence the-ism. Example...the moon + the sun or la luna (female) + el sol (male) or der Mond (male) + die Sonne (female) etc.
RELIGION (Latin religio; to bind anew) implies binding oneself by consent to the suggestion of another. In this case...true or false implies ones consent to suggested definitionism. It doesn't matter if one chooses true of false; only that one consent to the suggested definition of another; because ones consents permits others to define; redefine and contradict the suggested at will.
Suggested religion (to bind anew) tempts one to ignore being "free" will of choice; bound within "dom"inance of balance aka free (life) within dom (inception towards death).
TECHNOL'OGY, noun (greek art, word or discourse) aka artificial (suggested) over natural (perceivable). Ones consent to suggested; while ignoring perceivable shapes ignorance into the cover, hence apart (dis) conceal (cover).
The few suggest progressivism to lure the consenting many towards outcomes; goals; achievements; trophies; resolution; fulfillment; purpose etc. Why? To distract one from being (living) within origin (process of dying); hence needing to resist wanted temptation.
Free will of choice implies response-ability, hence one being able to respond to perceivable origin (need), while struggling to resist the temptation of suggested outcomes (want).
SEX (Latin seco; to divide)...natural order (inception towards death) generates internal/inherent division (life). Others suggest with (pluralism) as the inversion of being within (partial within whole).
One wants to "have sex" with others (temptation of lust); one needs to sustain self as sex (divided within whole) by intercourse through another for off-spring.
Off-spring implies apartheid within wholeness...not togetherness. Others suggest collectivism aka "we are family" aka FAMILY (domestics collectively) as the inversion thereof.
Ones consent to the suggestions of another represents slave (consent) keeping hold of master (suggestion).
Recent sleight of hand: https://img.gvid.tv/i/24euZoxM.png
a) to understand implies ones choice to "stand under" another one, hence repressing self. Others tempt one to repress self (understanding), while ignoring to express self (comprehension).
b) can you give me a definition of "not; nothing; nothingness"?
c) does nature communicate itself through words? What are the requirements for shaping a word?
d) you wrote about murder (unlawful killing)...killing implies "deprive of life", while being alive implies being moved from inception towards death. That's nature depriving those within of life aka lawful killing.
How could there be unlawful killing; while being killed lawful?
a) -ist implies ones consent to a suggested -ism; which contradicts SCI'ENCE (Latin scientia, scio, to know)...suggestion contradicts perception if one consents to it.
b) only within whole (loss) can there be partials (growth).
They're not humans. Synthetics. Welcome Transhumanism. When they have the A.I chips there you go.
a) "they" implies discernible HU'MAN (Heb. form, species)...does "not" have a discernible form?
b) hue-man implies visible spectrum...can one see "not"? What color does "not" have?
Form (human) represents trans-mutation within flow (animal)...suggested -ism tempts one to ignore that.
They're not human. At what is that a human?
Nothing human about it. It has been grown by an A.I.
If it developed into a humanoid. It isn't a human.
What use is that thing? Parts. Experiments. Slavery. It has no point. It will divide humanity. My forewarning is when they insert an automated brain, harvesting it like a cow is ethical.
It's a clone. How quick can they age it, is the next question. It won't be long before they're fully grown or given bionics.
I don't need a dumb bot explaining words. You aren't. I know the definitions. Synthetic, synthesised. Not human. So what if it's cells.
That's eight times using "nothing" as the foundation to define something. That represents the suggested embryo of nihilism germinating into ones ignorance of perceivable (everything) for suggested (nothing).
This represents a model of subversion by distracting partial (perception) from whole (perceivable) with a substitute (suggestion).
Ones consent to suggested represents INTELLIGENCE (Latin inteligo; to understand); hence one consenting to stand under another. ARTIFICIAL (artifice; fictitious; in opposition to natural) represents ones ignorance of natural (perceivable) for artificial (suggested).
In the aforementioned example of your behavior...you grew suggested nihilism (nothing) by perpetuating it eight times within a single response. That implies your consent (intelligence) and ignorance (artificial) aka AI.
HUMAN (heb; form) implies divided through ANIMAL (animation), and will (want) implies divided within need...animation forms will.
...represents suggested progressivism tempting others to ignore perceivable origin (reality) for suggested outcomes (fiction).
CLONE; noun - "a transplanted part of one original"...aka whole (inception towards death) transmuting into partials (life). Clone implies status quo of being, yet being willingly ignores perceivable implication for suggested dualism aka duplication (cloning) and that implies being a DUPE; noun - "a deceived person".
Knowledge implies perceiving everything moving: definition implies a suggestion of something affixed, and THE-ism implies ones submission to the authority of another one.
Definition (affixed) contradicts knowledge (moving). Nature doesn't define; it sets each one "free" (will of choice)...it's choice that can be tempted to choose to hold onto (affix) suggested definitions.
SYN'THESIS, noun -"composition; putting together"...being implies set (inception towards death) apart (life), while having the free will of choice to compose (as instrument aka instructed mind) within sound (entire; whole; everything perceivable).
Others suggest composition (collectivism) aka putting together...e pluribus unum (out of many; one) + tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together) + abrahamism (father of multitude) + miscegenation; mass migration; multiculturalism; melting pot + united states; united nations; european union; uniformity; university; universal basic income; unicode; one world system and so on.
Free-dom aka "free" will of choice within "dom"-inance of balance...that represents the foundation for ones confined mind (confinement; cell; apartment aka partial mind; compartment etc).
Balance implies momentum (inception towards death) of motion for each ones choice (life) within. Others suggest organism to distract one from being ORGAN (instrument of action aka instrumental choice within enacting balance). Ones consent to suggested organism permits others to suggest CELL (Latin celare; to hide; conceal; cover), hence utilizing ones consensual ignorance as the cover to conceal perceivable underneath suggested.