Choosing sex

[loseyourname]

I never said I was irritated. I said you were a fearmonger, using extreme examples to rile emotions instead of arguing from reason.

[sleuth]

I made my point in my firts post (in this thread),i quoted me and seems to me you agreed ... which makes me feel like you didn't even read first post or interpreted in your own way ..that's not my fault buddy....if u got the point i made earlier,you wouldn't label me...yes i do used extrim example in this case just to back up my opinion.

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by ckBejug And you're wrong and mr. mousey is wrong because NONE of you (and no offense sleuth but you too) actually understood my point. They take an EGG (still with me?) and SPREM (ok, going slow here...) and combine them. This makes (say it with me) embryos.... Good, you're keeping up. Now it gets a little touger here so try to keep up. They test the embryos (yes science has ways to do this) and say this little embryo is a girl and this little embryo is a boy. Now if the mom wants to be the mother of a son, then they throw away all the little girl embryos and then they use this thing called in vitro fertilization (a way to put the little boy embryos into the mommy's uterus) and then some of them 'stick' to the uterus and nine months later out comes a baby boy or two or three (as many as get implanted- or 'stick' to the mom's uterus). Still with me???

My problem: we are 'disposing of' the embryos of the unwanted sex. People, how is this any different than aborting and disposing of the embryo you aborted???

This is the crux of the matter. The people with low quality, always have quantity. The poor, and uneducated, breed faster than the intellectual class, therefore adding their numbers. Hitler believed that by encouraging those of the healthy and intelligent class to breed more, and limiting the breeding practices of the unintelligent, or poor, or criminal, will thereby constitute higher breeding for a better humanity.

[loseyourname]

Originally posted by sleuth I made my point in my firts post (in this thread),i quoted me and seems to me you agreed ... which makes me feel like you didn't even read first post or interpreted in your own way ..that's not my fault buddy....if u got the point i made earlier,you wouldn't label me...yes i do used extrim example in this case just to back up my opinion.

I have no qualm with your first post. It is in subsequent posts that you became a fearmonger. Again, instead of arguing from reason, you have argued from emotion, and you have used extreme examples in a blatant attempt to distract from what is actually being discussed and instill fear in the readers. If you have such a strong argument, then there is no need for you to do that.