'Abortion' and religious strawmen

Bottom Line:

If fetus are humans with full human rights they also have human responsibilities. If a fetus is inhabiting the body of a woman without her consent it needs to vacate or be charged with trespassing and assault. The woman gets to say who can and cannot be inside her body. Otherwise it's rape.

to a complete moron perhaps...
 
The first known conviction for the "intention to abort" was handed down in Maryland in the year 1652.2 Four years later, also in Maryland, a woman was arrested for murder after procuring an abortion, but the case was thrown out when she married the only witness, who then refused to testify.3 A 1710 Virginia law made it a capital crime to conceal a pregnancy and then be found with a dead baby.4 Likewise, a 1719 Delaware law made anyone who counseled abortion or infanticide an accessory to murder.5
Facts About Abortion: U.S. Abortion History


eots, you neglected to inform your reading public that the site you are quoting from is rabidly and fanatically anti choice.
Here's an excerpt from another page on that site
:

what a a distortion of the truth..shameful..you qoute an entirely diffrent artical..from a completly diffrent person to intentional try to mislead

from the top page of the artical posted

For those who support abortion, there is a tendency to argue that it has always been widely practiced and broadly accepted. Those who oppose abortion, however, generally argue that its permissive and widespread use is a recent phenomena. The truth probably lies somewhere in between.


Abort73.com / Abortion Unfiltered abortion_facts/us_abortion_history
Same website, same agenda. But thanks for playing.
 
Bottom Line:

If fetus are humans with full human rights they also have human responsibilities. If a fetus is inhabiting the body of a woman without her consent it needs to vacate or be charged with trespassing and assault. The woman gets to say who can and cannot be inside her body. Otherwise it's rape.

to a complete moron perhaps...

yawn

Try to refute my statement with logic if you think it's wrong.
 
Have you ever been pregnant?
The day medical science makes it possible for men to get pregnant if they have sex {maybe after JBeukema has eugenicized the human race) will be the day the pro choice movement will see an enormous jump in membership. :lol:
notice he didn't answer my question, because if he did it would prove even more that he has no idea how to confirm a pregnancy.
And you are very right, they day men have to deal with pregnancy is the day the abortion debate ends. The best is when you hear expecting father's say that they don't want their wives to have pain managment and that they should tough it out.
 
Bottom Line:

If fetus are humans with full human rights they also have human responsibilities. If a fetus is inhabiting the body of a woman without her consent it needs to vacate or be charged with trespassing and assault. The woman gets to say who can and cannot be inside her body. Otherwise it's rape.

reductio ad absurdium
strawman
appeal to ridicule

All in one shot...

very impressive
 
Notice that they still can't address any of the points made, and are totally reliant on their ad homs and various other fallacies and lies

and when have you responded to anything we have addressed? You don't, your only answer is to insult because you have no clue what you are talking about.
 
Eots and I have refuted all of your moronic posts. You've made no points or arguments. All you've done is shriek 'have you had a baby, fascist' over and over
 
Hell, I still remember Ravi citing the so-called 'failure' of anarchy to achieve an unspecified goal as reason that a child's life shouldn't be protected because we must protect the 'right to abort' in a fascist society...

Or whatever he fool's babbling about now
 
:

what a a distortion of the truth..shameful..you qoute an entirely diffrent artical..from a completly diffrent person to intentional try to mislead

from the top page of the artical posted

For those who support abortion, there is a tendency to argue that it has always been widely practiced and broadly accepted. Those who oppose abortion, however, generally argue that its permissive and widespread use is a recent phenomena. The truth probably lies somewhere in between.


Abort73.com / Abortion Unfiltered abortion_facts/us_abortion_history
Same website, same agenda. But thanks for playing.

it presents factual information as such..and editorial opinion as such which is very honest..unlike yourself
 
Hell, I still remember Ravi citing the so-called 'failure' of anarchy to achieve an unspecified goal as reason that a child's life shouldn't be protected because we must protect the 'right to abort' in a fascist society...

Or whatever he fool's babbling about now
Again, idiot, I never brought up anarchy. You've made no points, you've refuted no points...unless you've done so within the confines of your empty head.
 
and when have you responded to anything we have addressed? You don't, your only answer is to insult because you have no clue what you are talking about.
I think his latest posts indicate his mind is spiraling out of control. Don't hold your breath for an honest answer from either of these two.
 
Bottom Line:

If fetus are humans with full human rights they also have human responsibilities. If a fetus is inhabiting the body of a woman without her consent it needs to vacate or be charged with trespassing and assault. The woman gets to say who can and cannot be inside her body. Otherwise it's rape.

to a complete moron perhaps...

yawn

Try to refute my statement with logic if you think it's wrong.

if you follow your so called logic all the way through then it would be perfectly acceptable to kill an unborn child only secs before its natural birth...and the sentence for trespass would be death and without due process.... nice
 
Just about all of my life I have heard the arguments concerning abortion - both for and against. It's always the same old thing. Those that favor abortions are bad. Those that don't want to allow abortions are just being "goody two shoes..." It doesn't seem that anything concerning this debate has changed in my lifetime. It doesn't appear that the issue will ever be resolved. Why couldn't there be a group of folks, say, a few members of the clergy, a few people who have no religious affilation, a few doctors, a few regular old guys (or gals) from public life, an equal group of women and men together in a committee with the common idea of deciding when it is that actual human life begins. Then laws could be passed that allowed for legal abortion prior to the established date that the fetus was considered to be a human being. Maybe then everybody would be satisfied.
 
if you follow your so called logic all the way through then it would be perfectly acceptable to kill an unborn child only secs before its natural birth...and the sentence for trespass would be death and without due process.... nice

Duh! I guess you don't know my stance on abortion. Permissible until the foetus becomes a breathing child outside the body of a woman.

Actually due process has allowed for late term abortion.
 

Forum List

Back
Top