"Senator Kennedy, I Refuse to be Shackled by Your Question."

[meaner gene]

That doesn't answer Kennedy's question. Some of them did not in fact answer which means these people are not capable of ruling out an abortion for convenience.

It doesn't answer the question, but it requires Kennedy to rephrase, or give more specifics to his question.

 

[meaner gene]

That was not the question and it's telling that you question the question instead of giving an honest answer.

It could have been, with the same results

Just trying to make the person answer an essay question with a Yes/No answer.

Kennedys goal was to ask a question they couldn't answer in the form he asked it.

Simple politics.

 

[Leo123]

Actually Kennedy wouldn't let them answer with anything other than Yes or No.
He did not give them a chance to give a qualified answer.

Of course because his question contained no qualification. They could have and did refuse to abide by Kennedy's qualifications. This tells us that the ones who refused to answer were open to abortion at any time for any reason. What about this do you not understand?

 

[rightwinger]

If a woman learns that her baby is brain dead and will not survive outside the womb, should she be required by law to carry that child through delivery?

Yes or No?

 

[Leo123]

It could have been, with the same results

Just trying to make the person answer an essay question with a Yes/No answer.

Kennedys goal was to ask a question they couldn't answer in the form he asked it.

Simple politics.

"Would you allow abortion for any reason?" That's not an 'essay question.' All it requires is a 'yes' or 'no.' Anything else would be word salad. Which is what Kennedy was trying to avoid.

 

[meaner gene]

Of course because his question contained no qualification. They could have and did refuse to abide by Kennedy's qualifications. This tells us that the ones who refused to answer were open to abortion at any time for any reason. What about this do you not understand?

It's the same as if Kennedy asked them:

Did you stop beating your wife? Answer yes or no.

 

[Leo123]

If a woman learns that her baby is brain dead and will not survive outside the womb, should she be required by law to carry that child through delivery?

Yes or No?

No one is promoting that. The question is..... do you condone abortion for ANY reason. Seems to me the correct answer, for any sane person, would be NO.

 

[Leo123]

It's the same as if Kennedy asked them:

Did you stop beating your wife? Answer yes or no.

No it's not the same at all, besides I debunked you on that stupid shit already, why do you keep repeating losing arguments? Do you not remember I told you why?

 

[meaner gene]

If a woman learns that her baby is brain dead and will not survive outside the womb, should she be required by law to carry that child through delivery?

Yes or No?

Or another always fatal condition

Pulmonary agenesis
A rare and potentially fatal condition where the lungs do not fully develop during embryonic life. Bilateral pulmonary agenesis is always fatal,

There are probably dozens more similar conditions that make newborn survival impossible.

 

[meaner gene]

No one is promoting that. The question is..... do you condone abortion for ANY reason. Seems to me the correct answer, for any sane person, would be NO.

Actually that's one of the conditions where you would have an abortion up until birth.

The alternative is putting the woman through the stress of childbirth, with no possibility of infant survival.

 

[Leo123]

Or another always fatal condition

Pulmonary agenesis
A rare and potentially fatal condition where the lungs do not fully develop during embryonic life. Bilateral pulmonary agenesis is always fatal,

There are probably dozens more similar conditions that make newborn survival impossible.

No one is promoting that like I told RW in post #47.

 

[Leo123]

Actually that's one of the conditions where you would have an abortion up until birth.

The alternative is putting the woman through the stress of childbirth, with no possibility of infant survival.

So what? Kennedy's question does not prohibit that.

 

[meaner gene]

No it's not the same at all, besides I debunked you on that stupid shit already, why do you keep repeating losing arguments? Do you not remember I told you why?

You didn't debunk anything. These are a series of questions meant to not have a simple yes/no answer.

Did you ever answer this question?

If a woman learns that her baby is brain dead and will not survive outside the womb, should she be required by law to carry that child through delivery?

Yes or No?

 

[meaner gene]

No one is promoting that like I told RW in post #47.

Actually that's what happens if you say "no"

 

[meaner gene]

So what? Kennedy's question does not prohibit that.

It flips the Yes/No.

 

[Leo123]

You didn't debunk anything. These are a series of questions meant to not have a simple yes/no answer.

Did you ever answer this question?

Yes I did, I said Kennedy's question doesn't prohibit abortion in dire circumstances. You ignored my response and just went on with your stupid blabber. You don't seem to comprehend very well.

 

[Leo123]

It flips the Yes/No.

Do you or do you not condone abortion for any reason at any time? Yes/No. Where's the 'flip?'

 

[Leo123]

Actually that's what happens if you say "no"

If you say 'no' it doesn't mean abortion in dire circumstances can't be done. Which is what I already told you. Yes means you WOULD condone an abortion for convenience which is also what I already said.

 

[meaner gene]

Yes I did, I said Kennedy's question doesn't prohibit abortion in dire circumstances. You ignored my response and just went on with your stupid blabber. You don't seem to comprehend very well.

It does if you answer "NO"

Which is why they couldn't answer no.

But totally unqualified abortions would occur from answering yes

So neither answer applied.

 

[Leo123]

It does if you answer "NO"

No it doesn't it just means you so not condone infanticide.