"My Body, My Choice": The Worst Abortion Talking Points

[Vandalshandle]

I DO have control of my body and everything inside of it. Because of that FACT, I don't need to debate you.

Good grief, I'll explain against since English apparently isn't your first language. I did not once state that you are not CAPABLE of murdering that child, I stated over and over that the subject has always been the ethics of the act. If you like, I can go back and show you a screenshot of every single post I've made in this thread, since you either don't understand or want to keep trying to paint my argument as something it isn't.

Every single human on the planet is capable of murder, repeatedly stating that you can murder people and I can't stop you does not refute my argument that it is unethical. Do you just not understand what ethics are? Is that why you're not comprehending my posts?

I don't need a profound argument. I don't need to transform the subject. I don't need your permission to state my position over and over. I don't need to argue against you. Honestly I don't even read your entire posts. I don't have the patience for your bloviation.

Ah, there we go. You lack the attention span to read my messages, you probably don't read anyone's messages, and that's why you're just repeating yourself. Well, that, and you have no principles to explain. You legitimately DO need a profound argument to prove the ethics of your position, however you have no interest in exchanging ideas here. You're like Gollum, you don't explain why the 'ring' is yours, you only repeatedly state that something is such. This is not debate, nor argumentation, just you talking at people.

I am merely here to tell you, because you need to be aware, that all your nonsense will not change anything for a pro-choice woman who has made a decision to terminate her pregnancy. None at all.

All of my statements have been fact, not nonsense, hence you being unable to refute any of it. You'd be here to exchange ideas rather than repeat yourself, if your position were legitimate.

"Pro-Choice" is a fallacious title, you're against the choice of the child to do with its own body and life as it pleases. This is something you've yet to bother to even begin to refute, and that's because you can't.

Your ethics do not trump my ethics. Your values do not trump my values. your judgement of my morality is totally irrelevant.

 

[SAYIT]

Everyone can forget about the religious angle on this. God talked to me about it, and told me that he is cool with abortion. In fact, he told me that was why there is nothing in the Bible about it. He also told me that he, personally, causes miscarriages every day.

That wasn't God but rather just the little voices in your toaster that inform so many leftarded opinions. Very sad.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I DO have control of my body and everything inside of it. Because of that FACT, I don't need to debate you.

Good grief, I'll explain against since English apparently isn't your first language. I did not once state that you are not CAPABLE of murdering that child, I stated over and over that the subject has always been the ethics of the act. If you like, I can go back and show you a screenshot of every single post I've made in this thread, since you either don't understand or want to keep trying to paint my argument as something it isn't.

Every single human on the planet is capable of murder, repeatedly stating that you can murder people and I can't stop you does not refute my argument that it is unethical. Do you just not understand what ethics are? Is that why you're not comprehending my posts?

I don't need a profound argument. I don't need to transform the subject. I don't need your permission to state my position over and over. I don't need to argue against you. Honestly I don't even read your entire posts. I don't have the patience for your bloviation.

Ah, there we go. You lack the attention span to read my messages, you probably don't read anyone's messages, and that's why you're just repeating yourself. Well, that, and you have no principles to explain. You legitimately DO need a profound argument to prove the ethics of your position, however you have no interest in exchanging ideas here. You're like Gollum, you don't explain why the 'ring' is yours, you only repeatedly state that something is such. This is not debate, nor argumentation, just you talking at people.

I am merely here to tell you, because you need to be aware, that all your nonsense will not change anything for a pro-choice woman who has made a decision to terminate her pregnancy. None at all.

All of my statements have been fact, not nonsense, hence you being unable to refute any of it. You'd be here to exchange ideas rather than repeat yourself, if your position were legitimate.

"Pro-Choice" is a fallacious title, you're against the choice of the child to do with its own body and life as it pleases. This is something you've yet to bother to even begin to refute, and that's because you can't.

Your ethics do not trump my ethics. Your values do not trump my values. your judgement of my morality is totally irrelevant.

If you support or condone baby murder you have no ethics, morals or values

 

[Vandalshandle]

Everyone can forget about the religious angle on this. God talked to me about it, and told me that he is cool with abortion. In fact, he told me that was why there is nothing in the Bible about it. He also told me that he, personally, causes miscarriages every day.

That wasn't God but rather just the little voices in your toaster that inform so many leftarded opinions. Very sad.

Actually, I don't have a toaster. God told me that toasted bread is an abomination. If you have one, you must get rid of it, or you will be on the road to hell.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Again, like others hostile to privacy rights, you make the mistake of attempting to conflate religious dogma and subjective personal beliefs with that of the law, when you make wrongheaded references to ‘murder.’

Actually, I never claimed anything regarding or relating to law, I've been explaining ethics. If you're attempting to conflate ethics with law, perhaps you'd be willing to explain why the Government has legitimacy to murder, steal, extort, and kidnap, while the rest of the human race does not. Ethics are not personal or subjective, they are objective. If you want to argue about that, by all means, let's take it to the Bull Ring.

Murder is within the purview of criminal law, relegated solely to persons entitled to Constitutional protections.

Law has nothing to do with murder, claiming that it's a law-based thing only means that those who have become politicians have excluded themselves from the standards which apply to them. This is the fallacy of special pleading, and an appeal to authority, all wrapped into one.

The right to privacy concerns civil law – not criminal – having nothing whatsoever to do with ‘murder.’

Laws are just opinions written on paper by politicians, and backed by violence. Appealing to "law" is literally an appeal to authority and has nothing to do with my argument from ethics.

As a settled, accepted fact of Constitutional law, an embryo/fetus is not a ‘person’; prior to birth the organism developing in a woman’s body is not entitled to Constitutional protections, and as a settled, accepted fact of Constitutional law abortion is not ‘murder,’ the embryo/fetus does not ‘own itself,’ as it is devoid of any rights or protected liberties, entitled to no due process.

Once again, another appeal to authority. So, if it was "settled law" that the sky was green, Clayton here would believe it fully legitimate. Good to know that you have all of these random people you've never met before in your life to tell you how to think, and you blindly and religiously are fully willing to accept and roll with it.

As a matter of actual fact, the "fetus" does not fall into ANY other species, as it is a stage of development of the organism known as a "human". It is a human at the moment of conception, and is a living human at that, by all scientific criteria. Claiming that this self-owning agent does not own its life is merely special pleading. This self-owning agent has not infringed on any of the individual rights of another, or deprived them of anything, therefor the burden of proof is on the active party to justify murdering it. In this wall of text, you have not made a single ethical argument, one single solitary time. You appealed to authority over and over. This is why nobody likes you, Clayton, you just repeatedly tell us that something is so because the government claimed it, you made no attempts to even begin to justify it.

And yes, you do claim ownership of a woman’s body when you advocate for laws compelling women to give birth against their will through force of law; you do claim ownership of a woman’s body when you favor the authority of he state over a woman’s reproductive autonomy in violation of her right to privacy.

Point to one single time I advocated for the creation of any law, or that the Government should do anything.

You, of course, can't, because my argument was that the action is unethical, and that's because it is. We can also see that you made no move to claim that the action is ethical.

So, since you skipped over absolutely everything I said, and addressed none of it, I'll repeat the argument again, and hopefully this time the words I use are small enough for even you to understand:

The child is a living being, the child is human, the child is therefor a self-owning agent with individual rights of its own. The child therefor owns itself and its life. To deprive the child of its life, you must prove that doing so is ethical, by proving that it has inflicted demonstrable harm on someone else. Your argument is otherwise just special pleading.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

I DO have control of my body and everything inside of it. Because of that FACT, I don't need to debate you.

Good grief, I'll explain against since English apparently isn't your first language. I did not once state that you are not CAPABLE of murdering that child, I stated over and over that the subject has always been the ethics of the act. If you like, I can go back and show you a screenshot of every single post I've made in this thread, since you either don't understand or want to keep trying to paint my argument as something it isn't.

Every single human on the planet is capable of murder, repeatedly stating that you can murder people and I can't stop you does not refute my argument that it is unethical. Do you just not understand what ethics are? Is that why you're not comprehending my posts?

I don't need a profound argument. I don't need to transform the subject. I don't need your permission to state my position over and over. I don't need to argue against you. Honestly I don't even read your entire posts. I don't have the patience for your bloviation.

Ah, there we go. You lack the attention span to read my messages, you probably don't read anyone's messages, and that's why you're just repeating yourself. Well, that, and you have no principles to explain. You legitimately DO need a profound argument to prove the ethics of your position, however you have no interest in exchanging ideas here. You're like Gollum, you don't explain why the 'ring' is yours, you only repeatedly state that something is such. This is not debate, nor argumentation, just you talking at people.

I am merely here to tell you, because you need to be aware, that all your nonsense will not change anything for a pro-choice woman who has made a decision to terminate her pregnancy. None at all.

All of my statements have been fact, not nonsense, hence you being unable to refute any of it. You'd be here to exchange ideas rather than repeat yourself, if your position were legitimate.

"Pro-Choice" is a fallacious title, you're against the choice of the child to do with its own body and life as it pleases. This is something you've yet to bother to even begin to refute, and that's because you can't.

Your ethics do not trump my ethics. Your values do not trump my values. your judgement of my morality is totally irrelevant.

Then prove me wrong, explain how it's ethical to initiate force against an innocent person. You didn't even make an argument, you're just posting empty words with no explanatory power.

 

[beagle9]

God will sort it out. Bank that one

That's fine. Just as long as he doesn't try to get involved in our laws. That's none of his business.

Without God, you wouldn't be. Think about it.

To attempt to separate yourself from him and his judgement is impossible. Some will regret heavily the positions they have adopted in their lives, and the evilness they have turned to for guidance on the issues.

But none of this ‘justifies’ violating a woman’s right to privacy.

None of this ‘justifies’ compelling a woman to give birth against her will through force of law.

None of this ‘authorizes’ the state to criminalize a woman’s right to reproductive autonomy.

This is subjective religious dogma, devoid of legal merit, and Constitutionally irrelevant.

Listen closely, the woman gave up her right to privacy when she allowed another life to form inside of her womb. No longer is her privacy allowed to trump the life of a human being growing inside of her body. The state recognizes two human beings instead of one in the case of a pregnant woman. If she is killed along with her unborn baby in a crash where the drunk person is at fault that hit her, then two charges are levied in the case against the perp. One for the mother, and one for the baby. The drunk didn't just kill one, he killed two.

Wrong.

When a woman becomes pregnant, she doesn’t ‘give up’ her right to privacy – that’s ignorant nonsense.

The right to privacy concerns solely the relationship between the government and those governed, citizens entitled to their protected liberties immune from attack by the state, protected liberties not possessed by an embryo/fetus:

“…the state interest in potential human life is not an interest in loco parentis, for the fetus is not a person.” Casey, ibid

As for a pregnant woman killed by a drunk driver, that fails as a false comparison fallacy, having nothing whatsoever to do with the right to privacy, substantive due process, and the protected liberties of the woman.

Such laws have provisions prohibiting the criminal prosecution of doctors who perform lawful abortions.

Wrong, when a life separate of the mother's life is now involved, and the mother decides to take that life by any means nessesary, then the government has the right to step in per the laws protecting the right to life in this nation, and to stop anyone from taking the life that has now formed in the womb regardless of how the mother thinks that the baby will be a hindering person that might inconvenience her life once enters into the world. How sick is a person who will kill the life living in her body for inconvenient purposes or how sick is a person who would support such a thing ?? The indoctronation and desensitization of human life in which the leftist globalist has caused in this country is unfortunate to say the very least about it.

 

[SAYIT]

You aren't countering any arguments, and you aren't saying anything. The Right keeps circle jerking back to the same failed arguments...

Methinks thou doest PROJECT too much.
You continue to argue the same point - your belief in women's God-Given "right" to slaughter and flush unborn babies - ad nauseam, proving the OP premise ... that there is no good argument for abortion.

But it doesn’t end the life of an entity entitled to Constitutional protections – as a fact of law an embryo/fetus is neither a ‘person’ nor a 'baby,' where the protected liberties of the woman are paramount...

Babies in the womb are legally protected persons under circumstances other than abortion. How convenient.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx
The debate over fetal rights is not new to the legislative arena. Every session, pro-life and pro-choice advocates garner support for policies around this issue. The debate concerning “fetal homicide” hinges on the issue of fetuses killed by violent acts against pregnant women.

Currently, at least 38 states have fetal homicide laws...

 

[Vandalshandle]

I DO have control of my body and everything inside of it. Because of that FACT, I don't need to debate you.

Good grief, I'll explain against since English apparently isn't your first language. I did not once state that you are not CAPABLE of murdering that child, I stated over and over that the subject has always been the ethics of the act. If you like, I can go back and show you a screenshot of every single post I've made in this thread, since you either don't understand or want to keep trying to paint my argument as something it isn't.

Every single human on the planet is capable of murder, repeatedly stating that you can murder people and I can't stop you does not refute my argument that it is unethical. Do you just not understand what ethics are? Is that why you're not comprehending my posts?

I don't need a profound argument. I don't need to transform the subject. I don't need your permission to state my position over and over. I don't need to argue against you. Honestly I don't even read your entire posts. I don't have the patience for your bloviation.

Ah, there we go. You lack the attention span to read my messages, you probably don't read anyone's messages, and that's why you're just repeating yourself. Well, that, and you have no principles to explain. You legitimately DO need a profound argument to prove the ethics of your position, however you have no interest in exchanging ideas here. You're like Gollum, you don't explain why the 'ring' is yours, you only repeatedly state that something is such. This is not debate, nor argumentation, just you talking at people.

I am merely here to tell you, because you need to be aware, that all your nonsense will not change anything for a pro-choice woman who has made a decision to terminate her pregnancy. None at all.

All of my statements have been fact, not nonsense, hence you being unable to refute any of it. You'd be here to exchange ideas rather than repeat yourself, if your position were legitimate.

"Pro-Choice" is a fallacious title, you're against the choice of the child to do with its own body and life as it pleases. This is something you've yet to bother to even begin to refute, and that's because you can't.

Your ethics do not trump my ethics. Your values do not trump my values. your judgement of my morality is totally irrelevant.

Then prove me wrong, explain how it's ethical to initiate force against an innocent person. You didn't even make an argument, you're just posting empty words with no explanatory power.

There are people in the world who believe that I am condemned to hell as an infidel, because I do not pray to Mecca five times per day. There are people in the world who claim that I am an evil communist, because I am a democrat. There are also people in the world who claim that I have no ethics, because I am pro-choice. I give each of these opinions the same weight, which is none at all.

 

[BWK]

And yet you advocate to assume responsibility for that position as if you know more than God or rather you are a risk taker with your soul by thinking that you can out think God or convince God that you are right and he is wrong.

Maybe you should let God figure it out. He gave women the ability to access the contents of her uterus before birth. Was that just a mistake?

He slipped up with me already and accidentally admitted he was already leaving it up to God. This is his quote; And yet you advocate to assume responsibility for that position as if you know more than God or rather you are a risk taker with your soul by thinking that you can out think God or convince God that you are right and he is wrong.

Not up to me to leave it up to God, but more like following Gods will when it comes to recognizing life, and knowing that killing that life is evil. Once there is a consensus on that, then people have the free will to gather together, and to decide by vote, and then by laws to stop those things in which they don't want going on around them. You are the one trying to ignore the free will of the people by saying that what they think doesn't matter, but what you and just a few misguided in life think is all that matters. Doesn't work that way, and now that you have lost control of your bullyism in government, the people are gaining their rights to assemble peacefully back.

Again, words on paper will not stop a pro-choice woman from getting an abortion if she makes that decision. Even if they are signed with a Sharpie.

You have not stopped abortion, no matter how much you stomp your feet and insist it is true.

This "argument" isnt winning you any points. You've been slapped around thoroughly and you just keep coming back.

I went back ten pages on this thread, and you haven't presented any logical arguments against abortion. You're a troll and a bull shitter.

I DO have control of my body and everything inside of it. Because of that FACT, I don't need to debate you.

Good grief, I'll explain against since English apparently isn't your first language. I did not once state that you are not CAPABLE of murdering that child, I stated over and over that the subject has always been the ethics of the act. If you like, I can go back and show you a screenshot of every single post I've made in this thread, since you either don't understand or want to keep trying to paint my argument as something it isn't.

Every single human on the planet is capable of murder, repeatedly stating that you can murder people and I can't stop you does not refute my argument that it is unethical. Do you just not understand what ethics are? Is that why you're not comprehending my posts?

I don't need a profound argument. I don't need to transform the subject. I don't need your permission to state my position over and over. I don't need to argue against you. Honestly I don't even read your entire posts. I don't have the patience for your bloviation.

Ah, there we go. You lack the attention span to read my messages, you probably don't read anyone's messages, and that's why you're just repeating yourself. Well, that, and you have no principles to explain. You legitimately DO need a profound argument to prove the ethics of your position, however you have no interest in exchanging ideas here. You're like Gollum, you don't explain why the 'ring' is yours, you only repeatedly state that something is such. This is not debate, nor argumentation, just you talking at people.

I am merely here to tell you, because you need to be aware, that all your nonsense will not change anything for a pro-choice woman who has made a decision to terminate her pregnancy. None at all.

All of my statements have been fact, not nonsense, hence you being unable to refute any of it. You'd be here to exchange ideas rather than repeat yourself, if your position were legitimate.

"Pro-Choice" is a fallacious title, you're against the choice of the child to do with its own body and life as it pleases. This is something you've yet to bother to even begin to refute, and that's because you can't.

Your ethics do not trump my ethics. Your values do not trump my values. your judgement of my morality is totally irrelevant.

If you support or condone baby murder you have no ethics, morals or values

And you are a cut and run coward who cannot debate the very thing you so adamantly proclaim. What is your argument that it is murder? Answer, you have none, because you cowardly ran from my question. It can only be murder when you establish absolute truth through evidence as to when life begins. You can't answer that question so you are posting lies about murder, ethics, morals, and values.

 

[beagle9]

Listen closely, the woman gave up her right to privacy when she allowed another life to form inside of her womb.

That's your claim, and that's what we're rejecting. Perhaps it's you who's not listening.

It reminds me of the excuse for all the "public accommodations" laws - they claim that if a person starts a business, they give up their rights (property, privacy, association, etc...). That's bullshit. And so is your claim.

LOL.... You are one devious human being, and your attempt to twist everything into some sort of pretzel is making you look a fool on the issues.

What pretzel?? What are you talking about? What have I twisted?

If you can't see it, then maybe there is hope for you, but you need to quit working for evil.

You aren't countering any arguments, and you aren't saying anything.

The Right keeps circle jerking back to the same failed arguments. If all they do is to define life's beginning is at conception, they failed to prove that point. There is no scientific consensus. All that exist are theories. And since all of us have failed in proving when life begins by God's own words, then the anti-abortion argument will always be moot. Hence, why in the fluck don't you people understand why it is legal? No one can prove when life begins, and no one can prove life begins at conception. So what the hell are we talking about here? Answer, we are talking about religious, emotional, arrogant, ignorant, bull shit coming from the Right.

We are talking about rolling back the deplorable brainwashing our country has suffered under leftist propagandist, Marxist, communist, Nazi, globalist who have implemented all this stuff in order to divide and conquer this nation, and to bring it in line with some sort of one world government.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Telling someone "There's nothing you can do about it" doesn't even begin to touch on the ethics of the argument, you're only saying "They can". That's a fallacious argument because something being a certain way doesn't mean it should be that way.

"I'm not sure why I should listen to you" is just an appeal to ignorance. Refusing the exchange of ideas only implies that your ideas are so weak that you don't want to be exposed to others.

It's not "strong", because, as explained, it doesn't touch on ethics. If we did things on the basis of being capable, that's basically egoism, or "Might Makes Right". If that's the form of ethics that you subscribe to, I don't think anyone can actually explain actual ethical arguments and get through to your humanity, because "Might Makes Right" means you don't care about your own safety, that if someone stronger than you chooses to kill you, you're completely fine with that, because they can.

How about instead of stating "You can't stop me", you actually stop for a second to justify Abortion, since that's the active position, therefor carrying the burden of proof. I won't hold my breath.

Definitely a good idea about the breath holding.

If this were an issue that did not involve subjugation of my body to another person's will, I would be far more willing to discuss it. But I draw a line over control of my body and anything (child/body/tissue/fetus/baby/life....use whatever term you like) inside of it. That is simply NOT up for debate.

I question the ethics of those who think they have the right of control over my body and what is inside of it. That's some weird shit right there and you might want to re-think your sense of entitlement.

If you're not willing to exchange ideas, once again, it implies that your position is so weak that you do not want to be exposed to others. That's not surprising, since you're literally stating that you have a right to control over someone else's body. It's up for debate because it's a separate body, a separate life, with unique DNA at conception. You can not prove wrongdoing on the part of the child, therefor you cannot justify murder.

Stating over and over that it's your body does not fulfill the burden of proof to give you ownership over the life of another, nor does it fulfill conditions for self defense, nor does it prove that your rights override those of another. You also cannot prove that the child gave consent for its life to be ended. Absolutely everything is up for debate.

I don't claim ownership of your body, you fool, I claim that the child owns itself, and the burden of proof is on you, since your position is the active position, while the child's is passive.

Prove wrongdoing on the part of the child, prove the child does not own itself, prove that your rights override those of the child. You otherwise cannot claim that murdering it is ethical.

Again, like others hostile to privacy rights, you make the mistake of attempting to conflate religious dogma and subjective personal beliefs with that of the law, when you make wrongheaded references to ‘murder.’

Murder is within the purview of criminal law, relegated solely to persons entitled to Constitutional protections.

The right to privacy concerns civil law – not criminal – having nothing whatsoever to do with ‘murder.’

As a settled, accepted fact of Constitutional law, an embryo/fetus is not a ‘person’; prior to birth the organism developing in a woman’s body is not entitled to Constitutional protections, and as a settled, accepted fact of Constitutional law abortion is not ‘murder,’ the embryo/fetus does not ‘own itself,’ as it is devoid of any rights or protected liberties, entitled to no due process.

And yes, you do claim ownership of a woman’s body when you advocate for laws compelling women to give birth against their will through force of law; you do claim ownership of a woman’s body when you favor the authority of he state over a woman’s reproductive autonomy in violation of her right to privacy.

Hint Jones....you have absolutely zero cred on here. You're a hit and run poster and everyone knows it

Speaking of "hit and run", when did God or Science establish when life begins again? /rationalwiki.org/wiki/When_does_life_begin%3F

At the moment of conception, a new and unique DNA sequence is developed, all of the child's information is already contained there/ Ceasing this process is literally murder. What you're hinting at is the "If we kill it a second before people call it alive, it's not technically murder!", and it is. You used force against an innocent human to halt the process of their birth, that is death. What you're using now is solely an appeal to authority, you didn't support the assertion with a single argument.

 

[SAYIT]

Everyone can forget about the religious angle on this. God talked to me about it, and told me that he is cool with abortion. In fact, he told me that was why there is nothing in the Bible about it. He also told me that he, personally, causes miscarriages every day.

That wasn't God but rather just the little voices in your toaster that inform so many leftarded opinions. Very sad.

Actually, I don't have a toaster. God told me that toasted bread is an abomination. If you have one, you must get rid of it, or you will be on the road to hell.

Yeah ... AOC heard that also. She now believes it's best to avoid talking to your toaster:

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Maybe you should let God figure it out. He gave women the ability to access the contents of her uterus before birth. Was that just a mistake?

He slipped up with me already and accidentally admitted he was already leaving it up to God. This is his quote; And yet you advocate to assume responsibility for that position as if you know more than God or rather you are a risk taker with your soul by thinking that you can out think God or convince God that you are right and he is wrong.

Not up to me to leave it up to God, but more like following Gods will when it comes to recognizing life, and knowing that killing that life is evil. Once there is a consensus on that, then people have the free will to gather together, and to decide by vote, and then by laws to stop those things in which they don't want going on around them. You are the one trying to ignore the free will of the people by saying that what they think doesn't matter, but what you and just a few misguided in life think is all that matters. Doesn't work that way, and now that you have lost control of your bullyism in government, the people are gaining their rights to assemble peacefully back.

Again, words on paper will not stop a pro-choice woman from getting an abortion if she makes that decision. Even if they are signed with a Sharpie.

You have not stopped abortion, no matter how much you stomp your feet and insist it is true.

This "argument" isnt winning you any points. You've been slapped around thoroughly and you just keep coming back.

I went back ten pages on this thread, and you haven't presented any logical arguments against abortion. You're a troll and a bull shitter.

I DO have control of my body and everything inside of it. Because of that FACT, I don't need to debate you.

Good grief, I'll explain against since English apparently isn't your first language. I did not once state that you are not CAPABLE of murdering that child, I stated over and over that the subject has always been the ethics of the act. If you like, I can go back and show you a screenshot of every single post I've made in this thread, since you either don't understand or want to keep trying to paint my argument as something it isn't.

Every single human on the planet is capable of murder, repeatedly stating that you can murder people and I can't stop you does not refute my argument that it is unethical. Do you just not understand what ethics are? Is that why you're not comprehending my posts?

I don't need a profound argument. I don't need to transform the subject. I don't need your permission to state my position over and over. I don't need to argue against you. Honestly I don't even read your entire posts. I don't have the patience for your bloviation.

Ah, there we go. You lack the attention span to read my messages, you probably don't read anyone's messages, and that's why you're just repeating yourself. Well, that, and you have no principles to explain. You legitimately DO need a profound argument to prove the ethics of your position, however you have no interest in exchanging ideas here. You're like Gollum, you don't explain why the 'ring' is yours, you only repeatedly state that something is such. This is not debate, nor argumentation, just you talking at people.

I am merely here to tell you, because you need to be aware, that all your nonsense will not change anything for a pro-choice woman who has made a decision to terminate her pregnancy. None at all.

All of my statements have been fact, not nonsense, hence you being unable to refute any of it. You'd be here to exchange ideas rather than repeat yourself, if your position were legitimate.

"Pro-Choice" is a fallacious title, you're against the choice of the child to do with its own body and life as it pleases. This is something you've yet to bother to even begin to refute, and that's because you can't.

Your ethics do not trump my ethics. Your values do not trump my values. your judgement of my morality is totally irrelevant.

If you support or condone baby murder you have no ethics, morals or values

And you are a cut and run coward who cannot debate the very thing you so adamantly proclaim. What is your argument that it is murder? Answer, you have none, because you cowardly ran from my question. It can only be murder when you establish absolute truth through evidence as to when life begins. You can't answer that question so you are posting lies about murder, ethics, morals, and values.

Ahh shaddup ya befuddled loon. I think you're a total waste of air

 

[buttercup]

Listen closely, the woman gave up her right to privacy when she allowed another life to form inside of her womb.

That's your claim, and that's what we're rejecting. Perhaps it's you who's not listening.

It reminds me of the excuse for all the "public accommodations" laws - they claim that if a person starts a business, they give up their rights (property, privacy, association, etc...). That's bullshit. And so is your claim.

LOL.... You are one devious human being, and your attempt to twist everything into some sort of pretzel is making you look a fool on the issues.

What pretzel?? What are you talking about? What have I twisted?

If you can't see it, then maybe there is hope for you, but you need to quit working for evil.

You aren't countering any arguments, and you aren't saying anything.

The Right keeps circle jerking back to the same failed arguments. If all they do is to define life's beginning is at conception, they failed to prove that point. There is no scientific consensus. All that exist are theories. And since all of us have failed in proving when life begins by God's own words, then the anti-abortion argument will always be moot. Hence, why in the fluck don't you people understand why it is legal? No one can prove when life begins, and no one can prove life begins at conception. So what the hell are we talking about here? Answer, we are talking about religious, emotional, arrogant, ignorant, bull shit coming from the Right.

You are either willfully ignorant, or dishonest. Or both. There’s absolutely zero doubt according to science when life begins, it has been well-established for many decades that the life of a human being begins at conception, this is BASIC BIOLOGY.

I already posted a truckload of excepts from biology/embryology textbooks and clear quotes from scientists and doctors. And that was only a small portion of quotes, I could have posted more. But something tells me even if I posted 50,000 quotes, you still would not accept it because it’s not what you want to hear or believe.

Stop ignoring the clear words from basic biology and top scientists in this field, just so you can maintain your ignorant, misguided, spiritually bankrupt pro-death position.

By the way, if you’re genuinely interested in this debate, then watch this video.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

I DO have control of my body and everything inside of it. Because of that FACT, I don't need to debate you.

Good grief, I'll explain against since English apparently isn't your first language. I did not once state that you are not CAPABLE of murdering that child, I stated over and over that the subject has always been the ethics of the act. If you like, I can go back and show you a screenshot of every single post I've made in this thread, since you either don't understand or want to keep trying to paint my argument as something it isn't.

Every single human on the planet is capable of murder, repeatedly stating that you can murder people and I can't stop you does not refute my argument that it is unethical. Do you just not understand what ethics are? Is that why you're not comprehending my posts?

I don't need a profound argument. I don't need to transform the subject. I don't need your permission to state my position over and over. I don't need to argue against you. Honestly I don't even read your entire posts. I don't have the patience for your bloviation.

Ah, there we go. You lack the attention span to read my messages, you probably don't read anyone's messages, and that's why you're just repeating yourself. Well, that, and you have no principles to explain. You legitimately DO need a profound argument to prove the ethics of your position, however you have no interest in exchanging ideas here. You're like Gollum, you don't explain why the 'ring' is yours, you only repeatedly state that something is such. This is not debate, nor argumentation, just you talking at people.

I am merely here to tell you, because you need to be aware, that all your nonsense will not change anything for a pro-choice woman who has made a decision to terminate her pregnancy. None at all.

All of my statements have been fact, not nonsense, hence you being unable to refute any of it. You'd be here to exchange ideas rather than repeat yourself, if your position were legitimate.

"Pro-Choice" is a fallacious title, you're against the choice of the child to do with its own body and life as it pleases. This is something you've yet to bother to even begin to refute, and that's because you can't.

Your ethics do not trump my ethics. Your values do not trump my values. your judgement of my morality is totally irrelevant.

Then prove me wrong, explain how it's ethical to initiate force against an innocent person. You didn't even make an argument, you're just posting empty words with no explanatory power.

There are people in the world who believe that I am condemned to hell as an infidel, because I do not pray to Mecca five times per day. There are people in the world who claim that I am an evil communist, because I am a democrat. There are also people in the world who claim that I have no ethics, because I am pro-choice. I give each of these opinions the same weight, which is none at all.

So, you argument is that it's totally legitimate to initiate violence against others, because they think you're a bad person. By that logic, an infinite number of people can initiate violence against an infinite number of others, and it's totally legitimate, so long as they don't like each other. Basically, "I can hurt you because you disagree with me!"

A person disliking you doesn't inflict any demonstrable harm. The moment they attempt to initiate force against you is the moment hurting them is legitimate.

 

[BWK]

That's your claim, and that's what we're rejecting. Perhaps it's you who's not listening.

It reminds me of the excuse for all the "public accommodations" laws - they claim that if a person starts a business, they give up their rights (property, privacy, association, etc...). That's bullshit. And so is your claim.

LOL.... You are one devious human being, and your attempt to twist everything into some sort of pretzel is making you look a fool on the issues.

What pretzel?? What are you talking about? What have I twisted?

If you can't see it, then maybe there is hope for you, but you need to quit working for evil.

You aren't countering any arguments, and you aren't saying anything.

The Right keeps circle jerking back to the same failed arguments. If all they do is to define life's beginning is at conception, they failed to prove that point. There is no scientific consensus. All that exist are theories. And since all of us have failed in proving when life begins by God's own words, then the anti-abortion argument will always be moot. Hence, why in the fluck don't you people understand why it is legal? No one can prove when life begins, and no one can prove life begins at conception. So what the hell are we talking about here? Answer, we are talking about religious, emotional, arrogant, ignorant, bull shit coming from the Right.

You are either willfully ignorant, or dishonest. Or both. There’s absolutely zero doubt according to science when life begins, it has been well-established for many decades that the life of a human being begins at conception, this is BASIC BIOLOGY.

I already posted a truckload of excepts from biology/embryology textbooks and clear quotes from scientists and doctors. And that was only a small portion of quotes, I could have posted more. But something tells me even if I posted 50,000 quotes, you still would not accept it because it’s not what you want to hear or believe.

Stop ignoring the clear words from basic biology and top scientists in this field, just so you can maintain your ignorant, misguided, spiritually bankrupt pro-death position.

By the way, if you’re genuinely interested in this debate, then watch this video.

Wrong! Life at conception is nothing more than theory, and has been debunked by the scientific community; Why life doesn't begin at conception

As an infertility specialist, I witness human fertilization in the laboratory every day. The human egg is a single living cell and it becomes a one-cell embryo if it successfully combines with a live sperm. No new life is formed — the egg and the sperm were already alive — and fertilization is not instantaneous. Nearly 48 hours pass from the time sperm first bind to the outside of the zona pellucida, the human eggshell, until the first cell division of the fertilized egg. The two newly formed cells then have the potential to give rise to a human being, but only if they are appropriately nurtured so that they continue to divide and then successfully implant in the uterus.

This isn't hard to understand people.

And what happens when the "live" egg does not join with the "live" sperm? Take a wild guess?

When does life begin? It might depend on your faith.

 

[buttercup]

I DO have control of my body and everything inside of it. Because of that FACT, I don't need to debate you.

Good grief, I'll explain against since English apparently isn't your first language. I did not once state that you are not CAPABLE of murdering that child, I stated over and over that the subject has always been the ethics of the act. If you like, I can go back and show you a screenshot of every single post I've made in this thread, since you either don't understand or want to keep trying to paint my argument as something it isn't.

Every single human on the planet is capable of murder, repeatedly stating that you can murder people and I can't stop you does not refute my argument that it is unethical. Do you just not understand what ethics are? Is that why you're not comprehending my posts?

I don't need a profound argument. I don't need to transform the subject. I don't need your permission to state my position over and over. I don't need to argue against you. Honestly I don't even read your entire posts. I don't have the patience for your bloviation.

Ah, there we go. You lack the attention span to read my messages, you probably don't read anyone's messages, and that's why you're just repeating yourself. Well, that, and you have no principles to explain. You legitimately DO need a profound argument to prove the ethics of your position, however you have no interest in exchanging ideas here. You're like Gollum, you don't explain why the 'ring' is yours, you only repeatedly state that something is such. This is not debate, nor argumentation, just you talking at people.

I am merely here to tell you, because you need to be aware, that all your nonsense will not change anything for a pro-choice woman who has made a decision to terminate her pregnancy. None at all.

All of my statements have been fact, not nonsense, hence you being unable to refute any of it. You'd be here to exchange ideas rather than repeat yourself, if your position were legitimate.

"Pro-Choice" is a fallacious title, you're against the choice of the child to do with its own body and life as it pleases. This is something you've yet to bother to even begin to refute, and that's because you can't.

Your ethics do not trump my ethics. Your values do not trump my values. your judgement of my morality is totally irrelevant.

Then prove me wrong, explain how it's ethical to initiate force against an innocent person. You didn't even make an argument, you're just posting empty words with no explanatory power.

There are people in the world who believe that I am condemned to hell as an infidel, because I do not pray to Mecca five times per day. There are people in the world who claim that I am an evil communist, because I am a democrat. There are also people in the world who claim that I have no ethics, because I am pro-choice. I give each of these opinions the same weight, which is none at all.

You sure do bring up God and religion a lot. What comes to mind is the guy doth protest too much, methinks. It’s not even the topic here, yet it’s in most of your posts.

Interesting. And telling.

 

[NotYourBody]

This "argument" isnt winning you any points. You've been slapped around thoroughly and you just keep coming back.

It's not an argument pal. It's a fact.

 

[buttercup]

LOL.... You are one devious human being, and your attempt to twist everything into some sort of pretzel is making you look a fool on the issues.

What pretzel?? What are you talking about? What have I twisted?

If you can't see it, then maybe there is hope for you, but you need to quit working for evil.

You aren't countering any arguments, and you aren't saying anything.

The Right keeps circle jerking back to the same failed arguments. If all they do is to define life's beginning is at conception, they failed to prove that point. There is no scientific consensus. All that exist are theories. And since all of us have failed in proving when life begins by God's own words, then the anti-abortion argument will always be moot. Hence, why in the fluck don't you people understand why it is legal? No one can prove when life begins, and no one can prove life begins at conception. So what the hell are we talking about here? Answer, we are talking about religious, emotional, arrogant, ignorant, bull shit coming from the Right.

You are either willfully ignorant, or dishonest. Or both. There’s absolutely zero doubt according to science when life begins, it has been well-established for many decades that the life of a human being begins at conception, this is BASIC BIOLOGY.

I already posted a truckload of excepts from biology/embryology textbooks and clear quotes from scientists and doctors. And that was only a small portion of quotes, I could have posted more. But something tells me even if I posted 50,000 quotes, you still would not accept it because it’s not what you want to hear or believe.

Stop ignoring the clear words from basic biology and top scientists in this field, just so you can maintain your ignorant, misguided, spiritually bankrupt pro-death position.

By the way, if you’re genuinely interested in this debate, then watch this video.

Wrong! Life at conception is nothing more than theory, and has been debunked by the scientific community; Why life doesn't begin at conception

This isn't hard to understand people.

You post an opinion piece from an msm article? Lololol And then you disregard truckloads of excerpts from biology textbooks and scientists who specialize in this field? Don’t make me laugh. You’re being embarrassingly ignorant. PS, watch that video.