AJK Sexist?

[ohreally]

Is he or isn't he! :p

[Ausinus]

Yes. Irrefutably sexist, and I hope one day he meets Germaine and gets his balls cut of and shoved down his throat. :D

Germaine, we love you, keep that chopping block running.

Ajk is such
A sexist fundy fuckwit
Hope he meets Germaine

[who897]

Maybe we could find his home town newspaper and have something printed in there about his woman annomosity. His just has mother issues I think, the bitch wanted to abort him and now he's resentful.

[MrBirdy]

i just say so, cuz he doesnt like the idea of a female pope

[Ausinus]

Ajk is should have his lip taken and stretched to the back of his neck so he can feel what women feel during labour.

Wow everyone who has voted thinks that ajk is sexist. What a surprise.

[Ausinus]

Here is more proof that Ajk doesnt care about women.


As for rape, again it is unfortunate but as I said before life is not. We all have our own crosses to bear in one form or another. We need to learn to accept things for what they are, and try to move forward as best we can after that. We should take these lives as a blessing, not a curse

[gunrunner]

Maybe if we are lucky he will end up someones prison bitch.

[yea_thats_right1]

heh or some old dirty priests play toy!

[LolPwned]

Exactly. I agree he is very sexist.:)

[Ausinus]

heh or some old dirty priests play toy!

"So, ajk, you want to be an altar boy"

"No I dont, you took me from the playground"

"GOD TOOK YOU FROM THE PLAYGROUND!"

:D:D

[ajk]

Exactly. I agree he is very sexist.:)

Interesting, you tell me not to judge others and yet you judge me just the same. How hypocritical.

[something]

Interesting, you tell me not to judge others and yet you judge me just the same. How hypocritical.

Oh, c'mon. You are a sexist! And it's not a judge to say that.

[Ausinus]

Interesting, you tell me not to judge others and yet you judge me just the same. How hypocritical.

They arent judging you, as didnt say that it was a good or bad thing. They simply stated what you are.

[who897]

Interesting, you tell me not to judge others and yet you judge me just the same. How hypocritical.

I'm not christian, I am not bound by some idiotic rules that say judge not less ye be judged or some crock of shit like that....so if I wanna judge something, I'm going to. BTW where the hell do you sign up to be the judge of anything, ie Miss America, The X-Games, diving, etc?

[ajk]

They arent judging you, as didnt say that it was a good or bad thing. They simply stated what you are.

I am not a sexist by any means. I simply want all life to be respected, including that of the unborn child. You cannot just snuff out a life because it inconveinces you.

[theicidal maniac]

Interesting, you tell me not to judge others and yet you judge me just the same. How hypocritical.

Yeah, but it's a peer reviewed judgement, it's more like trial by jury, and you have been found guilty. Ass.

[ajk]

If you read my last post, you'll see why I am not sexist at all.

[gunrunner]

We all now your the one that will be roasting on and open fire in hell for all eternity. while the backstreet boys sing that they love you

[theicidal maniac]

If you read my last post, you'll see why I am not sexist at all.

Oh good point. So we should disregard all of the OTHER garbage you have spewed out and only read the posts YOU want us to read that make you look like a good person, does that pretty much encapsulate your stance?

[ajk]

Explain to me how trying to save the lives of those who cannot speak for themselves is sexist.

[Ausinus]

Explain to me how trying to save the lives of those who cannot speak for themselves is sexist.

Computer says no bullshit.

And plus not one person has voted that you are not sexist.

[ajk]

Computer says no bullshit.


Again explain why.

[ajk]

And plus not one person has voted that you are not sexist.

That doesn't prove a damn thing.

[Ausinus]

Again explain why.

We are pointing out the fact that you have not once suggested that men be forced to suffer the consequences, of your own volition, and that you say that women have no right to bodily autonomy once they enter pregnancy.

[Ausinus]

That doesn't prove a damn thing.

It proves that you are held in very little esteem by many.

[ajk]

I don't think they should, and I'll tell you why. A woman can do whatever she wants with her body. Keyword: HER. She cannot take the life of another, which is what she is doing here.

[ajk]

It proves that you are held in very little esteem by many.

Well whoop di do. I don't care what you think about me.

[Ausinus]

It is hardly a seperate life, if at all, as it is parasitic and it is completely inviable outside the mother. So in essence, yes, it is her life.

[ajk]

We are pointing out the fact that you have not once suggested that men be forced to suffer the consequences, of your own volition.

In a perfect world the man would have to take just as much responsibility for what happened. But unfortunately that doesn't always happen in reality. Doesn't mean the man isn't wrong for leaving the woman (he is), but the fact is sometimes this will happen.

[ajk]

It is hardly a seperate life, if at all, as it is parasitic and it is completely inviable outside the mother. So in essence, yes, it is her life.

Bullshit. It is not her DNA, it is DNA separate from her own. Therefore it is not her life and she cannot take it away.

[Ausinus]

In a perfect world the man would have to take just as much responsibility for what happened. But unfortunately that doesn't always happen in reality. Doesn't mean the man isn't wrong for leaving the woman (he is), but the fact is sometimes this will happen.

Well, then you would have to enforce legislation to force the man to stay if you are going to be equal. Which is illegal.

See. You are sexist. You are saying the mother has to take care of the baby, but with men "sometimes it happens".

[ajk]

No I'm not, I'm being realistic. I'm not saying I condone a man leaving a woman in the case of a pregancy, what I'm saying is I realize that it will happen. Doesn't make it right, but it does.

[Ausinus]

And that is the proof of your sexism. You say it is wrong, but you dont actually suggest we enforce it.

Besides, I know as a matter of psychology you are sexist. A child's view of the opposite sex are shaped mostly from interaction with the parent of that sex. Since you subconsciously believe that your mother doesnt love you because she tried to abort you, and your father stopped her, you hold men in higher esteem than women. QED

[ajk]

And that is the proof of your sexism. You say it is wrong, but you dont actually suggest we enforce it.

If it possible, then we should enforce it. It might cut down on the bed hopping I can say that.


Besides, I know as a matter of psychology you are sexist. A child's view of the opposite sex are shaped mostly from interaction with the parent of that sex. Since you subconsciously believe that your mother doesnt love you because she tried to abort you, and your father stopped her, you hold men in higher esteem than women. QED

I love both my parents thank you very much regardless of their past transgressions. And again I do not hold men in higher esteem than women. I just want all life to be respected. That's all I want.

[Ausinus]

If it possible, then we should enforce it. It might cut down on the bed hopping I can say that.

Well it isnt possible. Because of a little thing called the 4th amendment.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated"

And the 5th

"No person....shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property."

And the 9th

"certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people"

And the 14th

"no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunites of the citizens of the United States"


I love both my parents thank you very much regardless of their past transgressions. And again I do not hold men in higher esteem than women. I just want all life to be respected. That's all I want.

Whatever.

[ajk]

Yes but don't you think there comes a point where we should be deemed responsible for our actions, like if a guy gets a girl pregnant? He shouldn't be able to just run off like that. He should have to take care of it too, after all it takes two to tango.

[theicidal maniac]

I don't think they should, and I'll tell you why. A woman can do whatever she wants with her body. Keyword: HER. She cannot take the life of another, which is what she is doing here.

That life is a growth OF her body. There are tons of other organism in her body that you could call life. Hell you could even call each of her INDIVIDUAL SKIN CELLS life. Cells are alive after all. So should we deny her the right to use a pumice in the bathtub, to spare those cells?

[ajk]

Those are different. Those are all a part of her permanently. The baby is not a permanent fixture, and is separate genetically from her.

[Ausinus]

He should, but we cant do anything about it without radical amendments to the constitution, most of which would be contradictory to the existing ones.

This is another reason why a woman's right to choose is necessary, if she is incapable of supporting the child and she doesnt want to go through with the pregnancy, she can get it terminated.

[theicidal maniac]

Those are different. Those are all a part of her permanently. The baby is not a permanent fixture, and is separate genetically from her.

So are the organisms that live in her stomach

[ajk]

But again they are there permanently. (outside of cancers or whatever) the baby is not.

[ajk]

This is another reason why a woman's right to choose is necessary, if she is incapable of supporting the child and she doesnt want to go through with the pregnancy, she can get it terminated.

I understand that, but it goes against every being's right to life. You are robbing that being in the womb of it's right.

[Ausinus]

I understand that, but it goes against every being's right to life. You are robbing that being in the womb of it's right.

"All persons born or naturalised in the united states are citizens and are subject to the jurisdiction thereof"

-First clause of the 14th Amendment.

Foeti have no legal rights, nor should they be given any. It is the mother's property exclusivley, and should remain free from state interference. She has the right to terminate it if she so wishes.

[theicidal maniac]

I understand that, but it goes against every being's right to life. You are robbing that being in the womb of it's right.

EVERY BEINGS RIGHT TO LIFE???? What about Influenza? Streptococcus? Do they have a right to life? According to your Old Testament, non-christians don't have a right to life.

[ajk]

Well then I think it's time that changes so that the unborn are recognized as living beings, and as such would be subject to the same rights those who are already born have.

[theicidal maniac]

Well then I think it's time that changes so that the unborn are recognized as living beings, and as such would be subject to the same rights those who are already born have.

But you "THINK" it should be this way or that way...which reveals that it is your OPINION!. Meaning that it is up to individual to decide what they do with their bodies and the extensions thereof, and also whether or not they are ready to bring a life into the world. YOU don't get to tell SOMEONE ELSE what they can and can not do.

[Ausinus]

Additionally, that would bring it into conflict with the equal protection clause. Which means that you would have to decide between the mother or the foetus in case of complications, which legally would be a stalemate, as the state would be held accountable for the death of either the mother or the foetus.

It also creates conflict with other amendments. If a change was done to extend the rights to the unborn, then jus soli is basically thrown out of the window, and it would be a tantamount to banning both non procreative sex and masturbation, which conflicts with the "privileges and immunities" clause.

[ajk]

EVERY BEINGS RIGHT TO LIFE???? What about Influenza? Streptococcus? Do they have a right to life? According to your Old Testament, non-christians don't have a right to life.

No of course not. Those are viruses, things that can do harm if left alone. A baby is not a virus.

[Ausinus]

No of course not. Those are viruses, things that can do harm if left alone. A baby is not a virus.

Ajk is right, a baby is more like a parasite.

[ajk]

But you "THINK" it should be this way or that way...which reveals that it is your OPINION!. Meaning that it is up to individual to decide what they do with their bodies and the extensions thereof, and also whether or not they are ready to bring a life into the world. YOU don't get to tell SOMEONE ELSE what they can and can not do.

No it is not an opinion. Even if the government doesn't say it, it remains a fact.

[Ausinus]

No it is not an opinion. Even if the government doesn't say it, it remains a fact.

No, it is your opinion. Whether the constitution needs to be changed or not is an opinion. I am of the opinion that the united states constitution is one of the best in the world (Thomas Jefferson is my saviour), and doesnt need to be changed.

[General Septem]

Is there a point to this thread?

[theicidal maniac]

Is there a point to this thread?

I don't think so, why?

[ajk]

No, it is your opinion. Whether the constitution needs to be changed or not is an opinion.

I don't mean that, I mean about the fact that the fetus in the womb is a life. Obviously that the constitution should be changed to reflect this is my opinion of course.

[theicidal maniac]

I don't mean that, I mean about the fact that the fetus in the womb is a life. Obviously that the constitution should be changed to reflect this is my opinion of course.

Define "life"

[ajk]

I define life as being created at conception.

[ajk]

Is there a point to this thread?

The only point at first was to take shots at me (which is nothing new with these people), but now it's taken a different turn.

[theicidal maniac]

I define life as being created at conception.

So then creatures that reproduce asexually are not life?

[ajk]

Well those aside, I'm talking about human life here.

[theicidal maniac]

Well those aside, I'm talking about human life here.

And you are seperating human life from all other life forms because our life is somehow different, correct?

[ajk]

Well because generally it comes through reproduction, where as other forms of life may not neccessarily.

[theicidal maniac]

Well because generally it comes through reproduction, where as other forms of life may not neccessarily.

But cows come through reproduction...so are they lumped into our group? What about opossums? Is it just mammals whose lives are worth a damn...or maybe the term "life" is restricted in your mind to the Animal kingdom?

[ajk]

I know there are other forms that come through that way. And for those I suppose you could say the same is true there as it is for us. That at conception (if you want to call it that) there is life present there.

[theicidal maniac]

I know there are other forms that come through that way. And for those I suppose you could say the same is true there as it is for us. That at conception (if you want to call it that) there is life present there.

And do you feel that you are qualified to make that decision? Because pretty much everything you've said so far is in contradiction to what modern science tells us

[ajk]

I feel that I am right on this yes, regardless of what science may say. Fact is at conception that fetus, baby, whatever you want to call it is growing. The cells are and continue to divide right from the very beginning. Based on that it would seem to me that there is a real true life present in the womb.

[theicidal maniac]

ya know nothing really special happens when the sperm hits the egg...the sperm is still the sperm. In fact the sperm swims eagerly toward the egg so you could say that the sperm is alive in a way, could you not? That means that every time you have sex you commit billions of abortions in one instant

[ajk]

Yes but the difference is sperm fertilizes the egg at the point of conception, at which point the cells begin to grow and divide. Before that it's all potential life only, meaning it could become life but it won't neccessarily make it. Once conception happens however it goes from potential to actual.

[theicidal maniac]

Yes but the difference is sperm fertilizes the egg at the point of conception, at which point the cells begin to grow and divide. Before that it's all potential life only, meaning it could become life but it won't neccessarily make it. Once conception happens however it goes from potential to actual.

Yet it STILL may not make it. And ya know, the egg itself has no life to it, before OR after conception. It's just an egg either way. There is no instant change here, the only thing that happens is that the egg provides a place for the sperm to grow. But sperm can "live" in the male body for quite some time, they just don't have access to the kind of environment that an egg provides. But the sperm is still the sperm and the egg is still the egg. So jacking off is worse than abortion cuz your killing more "potentials"

[ajk]

So jacking off is worse than abortion cuz your killing more "potentials"

For once I actually agree, to a point. That's partly why it's wrong. Because it goes against what sex is meant to do. That is to reproduce. Obviously you cannot reproduce with yourself.

However, abortion is still wrong because you're taking away a life that more then likely is going to survive. Obviously it may still not (miscarriage), but most likely it will. We cannot take it into our own hands though. If it's not meant to be born, it won't.

[theicidal maniac]

For once I actually agree. That's partly why it's wrong. Because it goes against what sex is meant to do. That is to reproduce. Obviously you cannot reproduce with yourself.

Well I'm parodying your position, of course. I don't think jacking off is wrong at all. And again, the egg itself has no life to it, before OR after conception. It's just an egg either way. There is no instant change here, the only thing that happens is that the egg provides a place for the sperm to grow. So you can't say that it's life begins at any point or another...if anything it would be more likely that the "life of it starts in the testicles, because it is at a more previous time in the sperms existence, so IF IT DOES HAVE A BEGINNING, it would be mathematically more likely that it's "life" began closer to it's time in the testes than during or after it's sojourn to the egg.

[ajk]

I get what you are saying, but it "officially" becomes an actual growing life when it fertilizes the egg.

[MrBirdy]

I get what you are saying, but it "officially" becomes an actual growing life when it fertilizes the egg.

Please, for *** sake!! someone put a bullet in his sexist racist malignant cranium already!!

[theicidal maniac]

I get what you are saying, but it "officially" becomes an actual growing life when it fertilizes the egg.

According to who? "officially" in quotations doesn't do much for your argument.

[ajk]

Well I say officially because of what I stated before. As I said before that it's just potential life, once it hits the egg it becomes actual life. Whether or not it survives the 9 months remains to be seen, but regardless it is a life at this point.

[theicidal maniac]

Please, for *** sake!! someone put a bullet in his sexist racist malignant cranium already!!

Hold on now...We're actually LINKING ideas here, I'm making major progress here...soon enough AJK'll be thinking rationally like me. He shall be my greatest triumph.

[theicidal maniac]

Well I say officially because of what I stated before. As I said before that it's just potential life, once it hits the egg it becomes actual life. Whether or not it survives the 9 months remains to be seen, but regardless it is a life at this point.

But what you are saying is that it becomes a life when it hits the egg BECAUSE YOU SAY SO. And that's no reason for me to believe it. It isn't a convincing argument.

[ajk]

Why not, I already explained why it is a life. I'm not just saying it because I believe it to be so, I know it to be so for the reasons I mentioned before.

[who897]

HAHA so nocturnal emmisions and wet dreams are wrong according to AJK...priceless.

[ajk]

No that's entirely different then masterbation. Nocturnal emissions are simply the body's natural way to release tension. Therefore it is not wrong, because it cannot be helped if it happens. Masterbation on the other hand can be helped, by choosing to not do it. You can't choose to have nocturnal emissions or wet dreams.

[Ausinus]

No that's entirely different then masterbation. Nocturnal emissions are simply the body's natural way to release tension. Therefore it is not wrong, because it cannot be helped if it happens. Masterbation on the other hand can be helped, by choosing to not do it. You can't choose to have nocturnal emissions or wet dreams.

No it isnt, and it has been agreed with by the people on the forum you directed me to.

[ajk]

Well however you want to explain it, the fact is you cannot help it. Therefore it isn't wrong because it's out of your control.

[who897]

Well however you want to explain it, the fact is you cannot help it. Therefore it isn't wrong because it's out of your control.

Like all fucking shit steaks it aint....I could have my balls chopped off, or a vasectomy or have all my genitalia removed and have a tube run to my bladder. It is possible to not have those. Masturbation is natural, or else our genitalia would be placed in the middle of our backs!

AJK did you vote for yourself? LOL

[ajk]

Like all fucking shit steaks it aint....I could have my balls chopped off, or a vasectomy or have all my genitalia removed and have a tube run to my bladder. It is possible to not have those. Masturbation is natural, or else our genitalia would be placed in the middle of our backs!

Okay, let me rephrase that. It can't be helped if you don't have anything done put it that way. Masterbation is not natural, because you can help it. If it was natural that implies you can't.


AJK did you vote for yourself? LOL

No.

[Ausinus]

It must have been the general or some derranged person.

[who897]

Okay, let me rephrase that. It can't be helped if you don't have anything done put it that way. Masterbation is not natural, because you can help it. If it was natural that implies you can't.



No.

So then you voted w/ us in agreeing that your are in fact sexist?

Ummm straighten out your sentences, or elaborate because as of right now they aren't really making all that much sense.

[ajk]

I didn't vote at all.

As for the first part if you didn't understand it, what I mean is as long as you have nothing done to your penis you can't help having nocturnal emissions or wet dreams.

[who897]

Still stands to reason that we do have the capacity to rectify the situation of ejaculation....so therefore we are inherently "evil" in your eyes for that too...man not only are you sexist your a feminist too....how the hell does that work...someone please explain.

[Ausinus]

He has a subconsciously low opinion of women due to his view his mother didnt love him enough to let him live rather than have an abortion. Similarly, his opinion of men is boosted due to his father "saving his life".

Plus, no one will tell me what to do with my dick as long as it isnt illegal. There is no apo mechanes theos going to swoop in and smite me. Masturbation is a natural thing, it has been documented in many animal species.

[ajk]

Plus, no one will tell me what to do with my dick as long as it isnt illegal. There is no apo mechanes theos going to swoop in and smite me.

Keep in mind you could die at any time. Then you would see what damage you have done to yourself beyond this life. I don't care if you believe in it or not, but you will see one way or the other.


Masturbation is a natural thing, it has been documented in many animal species.

In animals, not humans. We humans are smarter then animals (at least for those who think instead of just act).

[Ausinus]

Got some news for you ajk, we are animals.

[ajk]

Still stands to reason that we do have the capacity to rectify the situation of ejaculation....so therefore we are inherently "evil" in your eyes for that too.

The act is, not you yourself.

[ajk]

Got some news for you ajk, we are animals.

Yes but we made smarter then other such animals. That is if we use it. If we don't then we're no better then the rest of them.

[Ausinus]

Masturbation is just a way of relieving sexual tension. There is nothing wrong with it, save in the small minds of those who believe in divine moral consequence, which I dont.

[ajk]

One day you will I can assure you. I only hope you realize your mistakes before it's too late.

[Ausinus]

Yeah well what makes you so sure your religion is the right one? There is no evidence, and because of that, it isnt fact or truth.

[who897]

I masturbate because it pisses other people off...mainly.

There are other reasons, but that is by far the most pressing reason right now! :D

I said that AJK is sexist and a feminist....I wanted someone to explain to me how that is possible. :D

[ajk]

Yeah well what makes you so sure your religion is the right one? There is no evidence, and because of that, it isnt fact or truth.


There is plenty of evidence. Your mind is just too narrow to see it and understand it.

[Ausinus]

There is no evidence which can be verified. If you can find any, feel free to share.

[ajk]

Again it's there if you look hard enough. Maybe not to the human eye per se, but it is there.

[Ausinus]

If it is not observable, then it is not proof.

[ajk]

It is observable to those who believe, if you would open your mind to the idea and actually try and see it you would. It isn't just gonna say: "Here I am" You have to try and seek it out too. The quote seek and you shall find applies here.

[Ausinus]

If god were so easily communicable, then you could describe the things that prove god to me right here. If not, then you cannot claim to have found the true religion or that god exists.

Knowing what to look for requires evidence in itself. You base scientific hypotheses off observations.

[theicidal maniac]

Why not, I already explained why it is a life. I'm not just saying it because I believe it to be so, I know it to be so for the reasons I mentioned before.

The "reasons" you mentioned before were that you "believe it", but that isn't REASON, it's opinuendo...you never presented me with any evidence to support your claim that life begins at conception, you just said it does, and you were wrong.

Also what you are talking about AJK is not a way to gain true knowledge. You can't start out with the end result in mind, and then go and try to find evidence that supports that, you have to use the evidence to come to a conclusion, the way Darwin did.

[ajk]

How is stating that those cells begin to grow and divide right at conception not evidence that a life is present there?

[theicidal maniac]

How is stating that those cells begin to grow and divide right at conception not evidence that a life is present there?

Because I pulled your definition of life out of you and it did not include bacteria, but that is the way in which bacteria grow at first, by dividing and dividing again. And they aren't EVER sexually conceived.So you are trying to have it both ways in your head, but both og those ways are incorrect.

[Ausinus]

Personally, I would say that a foetus' actual life rather than its potential one starts when it becomes viable outside the mother.

[theicidal maniac]

Personally, I would say that a foetus' actual life rather than its potential one starts when it becomes viable outside the mother.

I'm a father, there was definitely response from the unborn child in the late stages of pregnancy, I tap the belly, she tapped back...but I mean, at that point she even LOOKED like a human. Butas far as early term stuff, I mean, that is NOT a human, just a clump of flesh...none of the things that make us human apply to early term feti...

[Ausinus]

Exactly.

"All people have property in their own person. This nobody has a right to but themselves."

-John Locke

[theicidal maniac]

AJK stated that the human life begins at conception. I argued that nothing special happens at that time, the sperm still a sperm and the egg is still an egg. Thus, the only thing that changed was the sperms environment, so it was the same thing before in the testicles, and therefore, IF there was a BEGINNING of it's "life" it would have to be BEFORE it is ejaculated, as it lives in the testes in the same way it initially inhabits the egg. SO, the fertilization period is further along the timeline than the testicular residency and so the time spent in the testes is CLOSER to the time that it's life "began," again assuming that there is even a beginning to speak of, so if it is wrong to abort at the time of conception, it is equally wrong to destroy the sperm as it leaves the cock, worse in fact, given the magnatude of "deaths" involved. But my sperm are not people...they don't get to drive a car. And a clump of flesh with the computational powers of a venus flytrap may be alive, per se, but it is not a human IN ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN DESCRIBE THE HUMAN CONDITION!

Originally Posted by theicidal maniac
"EVERY BEINGS RIGHT TO LIFE???? What about Influenza? (VIRUS) Streptococcus? (BACTERIA)"

To which AJK replied;
"No of course not. Those are viruses, things that can do harm if left alone...I define life as being created at conception...Well because generally [life] comes through reproduction, where as other forms of life may not neccessarily."

AJK was referring to SEXUAL reproduction here, and previously had made statements which suggested that he believed only animals should be considered "living." But a sperm doesn't FIT the description of a mammal, or any other kind of animal.

[Ausinus]

Damn Straight. It is a gamete, a spermatozoa.

[MrBirdy]

How is stating that those cells begin to grow and divide right at conception not evidence that a life is present there?

So, would a sperm cell be concidered life? as it, also has (ver, very, very) limited thought?

[Ausinus]

If you can call it that. Its more like instinct or following a chemical thingy. :D

[General Septem]

So, would a sperm cell be concidered life? as it, also has (ver, very, very) limited thought?
Not a human life, no. I mean they're cells so they're alive, but they're not human beings.