Why Can't the Pro-Choice Crowd Be Honest?

[JBeukema]

Umm, it's never justifiable to drown a 3 year old

So all your talk about that grey zone was bullshit?

Part II. by his "seed," I meant aborting what he had done inside of my wife. That's not criminal.

Depends on when you do it

Part III. I have no problem calling abortion in the case of rape, or woman in danger of dying, Justifiable Homicide.

What about if she just decides she doesn't want it? In none of those cases did you the child you're killing do anything to anyone. You're shooting your neighbor in the face because of his father's sins.

 

[JBeukema]

I emphatically agree that abortion is terminating human life.

But life expires all the time for a variety of reasons.

Convince me that I should value the life of someone else's fetus more than the child's own mother?

Do you care if a woman drowns her three-year-old son in a bathtub? Should society step up and say that's wrong? Should it be illegal? After all, she didn't care about his life.

Homicide has always been recognized as a social issue. Either you think society needs to take collective action against those who commit such deeds or you do not.

IMO, the event of birth elevates the value of a human life

Why? What fundamental changes take places when the child is moved three feet to the left?

Let me guess, you're going to borrow JD_2B's breath argument?

 

[Ravi]

The only emotional ones are you pro-abortionists pretending most women get abortions for rape, comparing personal responsibility to slavery, declaring that only serial killers can have an opinion on serial murder, and refusing to acknowledge basic facts of biology- even going so far as to declare that one can become a non-human when in the hospital and then magically be a human again when they get off life support- all in an effort to avoid admitting what it is you support.

If killing an unborn child isn't wrong, why can't you admit you support killing unborn children?

No one claims that. Women get abortions mostly because they aren't ready to give birth or they cannot emotionally or financially add to their brood.

 

[G.T.]

Umm, it's never justifiable to drown a 3 year old

So all your talk about that grey zone was bullshit?

Part II. by his "seed," I meant aborting what he had done inside of my wife. That's not criminal.

Depends on when you do it

Part III. I have no problem calling abortion in the case of rape, or woman in danger of dying, Justifiable Homicide.

What about if she just decides she doesn't want it? In none of those cases did you the child you're killing do anything to anyone. You're shooting your neighbor in the face because of his father's sins.

I don't think it's "right" for Abortion short of the reasons of Rape and Maternal (death) risk. That is my opinion.

Look, examine how you conversate. You take snippets like above (so much for all of the gray area) that are inane to the conversation that you can take an "ahah!!" at, and it doesn't advance the conversation maturely, it only serves as a geeky self back-pat. The gray area I was referring to was in direct response to your calling abortion "murder," not to life in general.

Sure, there's things in life that are black and white. Murdering a 3 year old is one of those, for me. If you disagree and have a decent argument, I'm not going to be a tool and go "Murderer!!!" But that's just me.


My point was, that in THIS case, instead of handling disagreements like a grown assed man (i.e. me calling it justifiable, sometimes, to abort, being my "gray area," which I was referring to), you take the sophomoric approach and pick out inane bits of nothingness to avoid the actual meat of the conversation. There's a phrase for that. Cop-out.

 

[manifold]

Do you care if a woman drowns her three-year-old son in a bathtub? Should society step up and say that's wrong? Should it be illegal? After all, she didn't care about his life.

Homicide has always been recognized as a social issue. Either you think society needs to take collective action against those who commit such deeds or you do not.

IMO, the event of birth elevates the value of a human life

Why? What fundamental changes take places when the child is moved three feet to the left?

The fundamental change is birth.

Look it up if you're unfamiliar with the subject.

 

[liebuster]

Think what you will, as it is beyond my control. What IS in my control is MY BODY. Nobody elses. And until you are impregnated with a life you didnt ask for growing in it, you have no say.

I thought the same way you did when I was a teenager. Its only some "cells" and I believe its the womens right to choose, that is, until I had children.......

Not sure if you have children but until you see a beautiful living being that was created from you then you have no idea.

 

[ABikerSailor]

If one's position is defensible, shouldn't you be able to defend it with logical, cogent, well-thought-out arguments? Shouldn't you be able to discuss the matter in an honest and intelligent manner?

A blastocyst/foetus/etc is an organism. It is alive and it is genetically human.* These are verifiable, objective, demonstrable scientific facts. It is all a matter of basic biology.

Therefore, the child is be definition a living human organism. We are, therefore, dealing with a human life. To 'abort' a pregnancy is to bring about the end of those physiological and biological processes that identify this human organism as alive- it is to bring about the child's death.

It is therefore a scientific fact that when we speak of abortion, we speak of ending human life. As we are also humans, we are therefore dealing with a case of homicide- homicide is defined as the killing of a human being by another human being.

If your position is defensible- if the ending of this life is a defensible ac- then you should be able to demonstrate why this is justifiable or acceptable without denying the facts of what it is you support. When pretend that we're not dealing with a living human being, you reveal that one or both of the following is true:
-You do not know what it is you advocate; you are guided purely by your emotion and your programming. You should shut your fucking mouth and not speak about things you do not understand

-You know your position is indefensible; you must lie about what it is you advocate because you cannot honestly defend your position






*Yes, I know a foetus can die in utero without the woman's body expelling it [see: stone foetus] and that humans aren't the only species to experience pregnancy. Given the context, such things should go unsaid. Let us exercise a little critical thinking here.

Science has also proven that the mass of cells does not develop a nervous system until AFTER the 40 day point.

My opinion? A mass of cells growing in a human body isn't necessarily "life", because a growing mass of cells can also be a cancerous growth.

What makes us "human"? Our ability to reason, and our ability to be self aware. Until that mass of cells grows a nervous system, it's not "human".

 

[JBeukema]

The only emotional ones are you pro-abortionists pretending most women get abortions for rape, comparing personal responsibility to slavery, declaring that only serial killers can have an opinion on serial murder, and refusing to acknowledge basic facts of biology- even going so far as to declare that one can become a non-human when in the hospital and then magically be a human again when they get off life support- all in an effort to avoid admitting what it is you support.

If killing an unborn child isn't wrong, why can't you admit you support killing unborn children?

No one claims that. Women get abortions mostly because they aren't ready to give birth or they cannot emotionally or financially add to their brood.

So you admit most abortions are done because the baby is inconvenient? We've made progress.

 

[JBeukema]

I don't think it's "right" for Abortion short of the reasons of Rape and Maternal (death) risk. That is my opinion.

Why is killing an unborn child okay if the mother was raped but not if she was just stupid?

How does your parents' relationship determine whether it's okay to kill you? You never presented any cogent arguments to make that case.

 

[JBeukema]

IMO, the event of birth elevates the value of a human life

Why? What fundamental changes take places when the child is moved three feet to the left?

The fundamental change is birth.

Look it up if you're unfamiliar with the subject.

Birth: moving three feet to the left

you're dodging

 

[JBeukema]

Think what you will, as it is beyond my control. What IS in my control is MY BODY. Nobody elses. And until you are impregnated with a life you didnt ask for growing in it, you have no say.

I thought the same way you did when I was a teenager. Its only some "cells" and I believe its the womens right to choose, that is, until I had children.......

Not sure if you have children but until you see a beautiful living being that was created from you then you have no idea.

You're appealing to emotion

That's not a cogent argument

 

[logical4u]

Now hold on there a sec. Having an abortion is not an easy thing to do. It is no picnic, I guarantee you. I dont have to defend myself when it comes to my body. Wanna call me a murderer? Go ahead. Ive called myself much worse when I had it done many many MANY years ago. Its nobodies business why I had it done and I answer to nobody on why I did it.

Say what you will. Unless you are a woman....you have no clue.

I am sorry for your loss. Would you recommend that path to another?

 

[manifold]

Why? What fundamental changes take places when the child is moved three feet to the left?

The fundamental change is birth.

Look it up if you're unfamiliar with the subject.

Birth: moving three feet to the left

you're dodging

Equating birth to moving three feet to the left is no less disingenuous than equating a fetus to a lump of nerves.

You're refusing to acknowledge a valid line of reasoning, simpy because you disagree with a value judgement that is necessarily vital to drawing any conclusion on the matter.

Got anything else?

 

[JBeukema]

Science has also proven that the mass of cells does not develop a nervous system until AFTER the 40 day point.

And? Do you have a point? Is that relevent to some argument you intend to make?

My opinion? A mass of cells growing in a human body isn't necessarily "life", because a growing mass of cells can also be a cancerous growth.

We're not talking about cancer. We're talking a new human being growing and developing as it will do (forbidding any unforeseens) for a great many years.

Life has a meaning. Whether something is alive or not is a matter of biology. Whether it is an organism or not is a matter of biology. It if it a live and an organism, it is a living organism. If an organism is genetically human, it is a human being by definition. If an organism is both alive and human we are dealing with human life.

Your whole 'I'm nothing more than a tumour that dropped from mah momma's **** and walks now' spiel is bullshit. It's an attempt to avoid the issue. If you have an argument, why can't you just make it?

What makes us "human"? Our ability to reason, and our ability to be self aware. Until that mass of cells grows a nervous system, it's not "human".

So the rest of your moronic post can be ignored and we can count you among the sentience crowd? You went through all that to ultimately reach 'JB is right'?

 

[Ravi]

The only emotional ones are you pro-abortionists pretending most women get abortions for rape, comparing personal responsibility to slavery, declaring that only serial killers can have an opinion on serial murder, and refusing to acknowledge basic facts of biology- even going so far as to declare that one can become a non-human when in the hospital and then magically be a human again when they get off life support- all in an effort to avoid admitting what it is you support.

If killing an unborn child isn't wrong, why can't you admit you support killing unborn children?

No one claims that. Women get abortions mostly because they aren't ready to give birth or they cannot emotionally or financially add to their brood.

So you admit most abortions are doine because the baby is inconvenient? We've made progress.

Why do you lie so much...it chips away at what little credibility you have.

 

[Immanuel]

The only emotional ones are you pro-abortionists pretending most women get abortions for rape, comparing personal responsibility to slavery, declaring that only serial killers can have an opinion on serial murder, and refusing to acknowledge basic facts of biology- even going so far as to declare that one can become a non-human when in the hospital and then magically be a human again when they get off life support- all in an effort to avoid admitting what it is you support.

If killing an unborn child isn't wrong, why can't you admit you support killing unborn children?

No one claims that. Women get abortions mostly because they aren't ready to give birth or they cannot emotionally or financially add to their brood.

So you admit most abortions are doine because the baby is inconvenient? We've made progress.

And people say discussing abortion is pointless... that no one ever changes their minds.

Immie

 

[JBeukema]

The fundamental change is birth.

Look it up if you're unfamiliar with the subject.

Birth: moving three feet to the left

you're dodging

Equating birth to moving three feet to the left is no less disingenuous than equating a fetus to a lump of nerves.

Alright, four feet. Or fifteen. It depends how far away the sink is. I suppose.

If you have an argument, make it. What fundamental aspect of the baby changes during when it moves a number of feet through space?

Al already asked whether you want to go with JD_2B's breath argument. (What if I kill it before it breathes, but after it's out?) What if one toe remains inside? Do I have to wait for the afterbirth?

You're refusing to acknowledge a valid line of reasoning,

No, I'm not. You haven't made one. You said it's different at birth because_______________ something changes at birth. But you can't tell me what it is. It just is because it is because it changes at birth because it's born. You sound like a YEC explaining how it knows the bible is the word of god because it says it is.

 

[logical4u]

No, YOU are playing semantics. If willfully ending a human life is murder, then all soldiers who end another person's life are murderers. No one is forcing them to kill are they?

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit is it? Already agreed to the term. And specified the difference.

Still waiting by the way , for some evidence that Pro Life people do not care about the crawling or the walking.

So we can assume that you are in favor of social programs in place to assist poor families and single mothers?

If you are "mature" enough to participate in sexual activities (this does not include rape victims), you should be responsible enough to use birth control. If you "choose" to participate in sexual activity, and "choose" not to use birth control, you should "choose" to support your child. If you cannot do that, it appears that you "choose" to put yourself on the same level as animals (drop the offspring and give it enough care til it can run on its own, then leave it to make a new one). Which will you "choose"?

 

[JBeukema]

No one claims that. Women get abortions mostly because they aren't ready to give birth or they cannot emotionally or financially add to their brood.

So you admit most abortions are done because the baby is inconvenient? We've made progress.

Why do you lie so much...it chips away at what little credibility you have.

That's what you said

They don't want to grow up or get another job or ask family for help... they're an emotional or financial burden

they're too inconvenient

That's what you said

 

[JBeukema]

The only emotional ones are you pro-abortionists pretending most women get abortions for rape, comparing personal responsibility to slavery, declaring that only serial killers can have an opinion on serial murder, and refusing to acknowledge basic facts of biology- even going so far as to declare that one can become a non-human when in the hospital and then magically be a human again when they get off life support- all in an effort to avoid admitting what it is you support.

If killing an unborn child isn't wrong, why can't you admit you support killing unborn children?

No one claims that. Women get abortions mostly because they aren't ready to give birth or they cannot emotionally or financially add to their brood.

And killing them is better than putting them with a good home?