He can't even address or explain the "value" of the unborn. Nevermind expecting any consideration whatsoever for the woman herself. It's basically a fetus obsession.He completely disregards that and it's been explained to him many times. He pretends he hasnt because he doesnt value the life of the woman, he doesnt think of her at all.
Inside the woman, the govt cannot protect or act on the unborn without removing her right to consent to her own life and bodily autonomy, without violating many of her Const rights. Once born ("outside") the woman, the govt and society can protect or act on the unborn without risking her life, her health, or her rights.
But over and over, he dishonestly pretends he hasnt seen thisbefore. Nor will he address it.
Before birth, it's little more than a gestational parasite. What's the "value" on that?so before birth its dead ? its not a living human being ? birth is the start of life and thus the start of value - that's your argument ?
Why? My premise does not depend on “ value of life”you go first
"Most societies." Let's run with that. The Constitution (and its interpreter, SCOTUS) does not recognize any rights for the unborn and the majority of Americans support elective abortion (for other than medical reasons.) On a broader scale, we have this:
Article 1All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
So your "appeal to authority" doesnt work. Do you have any legal or moral justification for denying women the much safer medical procedure of abortion? It cant be "because human life has value" because you cant even quantify that and then you were quite willing to sacrifice the unborn in compromises earlier.
so before birth its dead ? its not a living human being ? birth is the start of life and thus the start of value - that's your argument ?
No.so before birth its dead ? its not a living human being ? birth is the start of life and thus the start of value - that's your argument ?
I'd say because it's illogical. The fact that he cannot even explain "value", which is the crux of his argument, demonstrates how weak his argument really is. It's based on nothing more than his feelings. Nothing rational or objective.Why? My premise does not depend on “ value of life”
Your argument seems to be all about value of life.
Why can’t you defend your own position?
Stop with the dishonest debate tactics and deflection! You're the one making assertions or claims of value, so the onus is on YOU to explain or prove it! I'm not making your so called argument for you!
What makes it valuable in the first place, before or after? What's the value?
so you're ok with hospitals denying prenatal care - its not a baby right? there is no reason for fetal surgeries - its not a living human right? Fetal protection laws ... ridiculous right? why have them ?
you probably think its so stupid for people to get excited about pregnancy and babies or for pregnant women to watch their foods, take vitamins, no smoking/drugs etc .... its not a living human baby in there, why do they care?
the US Constitution doesn't specifically mention a lot of things .... what if the Constitution was changed, would you change your mind/opinion ? If not, then don't use it as part of your pillars
No.
That's your strawman.
Oh my! More questions! And more hiding from directly answering or responding. I didnt read past the first sentence. You have many questions to answer...try doing that first...debates are supposed to move forward in a linear fashion...not like ants in a washing machine...willy nilly wherever you think will serve you best to hide behind.
I'd say because it's illogical. The fact that he cannot even explain "value", which is the crux of his argument, demonstrates how weak his argument really is. It's based on nothing more than his feelings. Nothing rational or objective.
questions you can't answer because everything I listed? you want all that ... why? because the mother and unborn NEED it
the living human unborn needs it .... the unborn baby needs all those things
Prenatal care is as much for the woman gestating it as it is for the gestational parasite. A woman does not have to seek prenatal care at all. But if she chooses to, then it's likely she wants to continue the pregnancy. It's all about what the woman wants.so you're ok with hospitals denying prenatal care - its not a baby right? there is no reason for fetal surgeries
Whomever said that? Whether it's living or not is not the issue. Neither is it relevant to the issue.its not a living human right?
I have asked the same question. Fetal protection laws are ridiculous and there's no rational or legal basis to have them, the same with abortion restrictions.Fetal protection laws ... ridiculous right? why have them ?
Many certainty become emotional and irrational about it.you probably think its so stupid for people to get excited about pregnancy and babies
That assumes the pregnant woman wants to continue a pregnancy and have a healthy a child or be healthy themselves as best as possible.or for pregnant women to watch their foods, take vitamins, no smoking/drugs etc .... its not a living human baby in there, why do they care?
It does specifically mention that a person with rights must be born. Therefore, gestational contents have neither rights or personhood.the US Constitution doesn't specifically mention a lot of things .... what if the Constitution was changed, would you change your mind/opinion ? If not, then don't use it as part of your pillars
Again, why would I? I'm not the one arguing value here, much less the "value" of myself. It's not even a factor in my arguments. That's all you. Why don't you explain the value of human life, since that is your assertion!nor can you explain your "value" .... see that?
give us yours - tell us all how invaluable human life is, explain it in detail .... but I don't think you will
Specify where I ever said or claimed life isn't valuable! You said it's valuable. So prove it! Explain the "value" of life!you tell me why life isn't valuable - go ahead, explain it, I'm all ears
but you won't, and I know it and you know it .......
Reread your nonsense post then get back to me.oh its not a strawman
you and I know its the same baby
Not a baby (neonate) until it's born.oh its not a strawman
you and I know its the same baby
Says the one who won't answer the question, what is the value of life? Yeah, your in no position to call out anyone for not answering questions, much less have any credibility for your arguments.questions you can't answer because everything I listed? you want all that ... why? because the mother and unborn NEED it
the living human unborn needs it .... the unborn baby needs all those things
I'm sensing a repeating pattern here.Oh my! More questions! And more hiding from directly answering or responding.
why just the woman? why can't a hospital say "hey, that's not a living human, we've not spending money on that !" (its not valuable) why can't our judicial system just realize when there is a murder of a pregnant woman its just one - why have penalties for killing a non alive, not valuable unborn? Every law we have protect the unborn doesn't it ? except oneNeed what? What does the unborn "need" more than the woman?
What does it "need" at her sacrifice and expense and consent as an individual?
Specify where I ever said or claimed life isn't valuable! You said it's valuable. So prove it! Explain the "value" of life!
The hospital wouldn't be spending anything. It's paid for by the patient's insurance or out of pocket. But if cost is a factor, abortion is far cheaper and safer.why just the woman? why can't a hospital say "hey, that's not a living human, we've not spending money on that !" (its not valuable)
I agree, such laws should not exist. There is no legal reason for them. Those laws are just knee jerk emotional responses or derived.why can't our judicial system just realize when there is a murder of a pregnant woman its just one - why have penalties for killing a non alive, not valuable unborn? Every law we have protect the unborn doesn't it ? except one
And she can choose actions to end that "life" too. It's her body and bodily resources being used to support that "life." And legal precedent establishes that no one can be compelled to have their body used to support another. And where did I ever say "kill them at any age?" That's just another lie!because she chose actions that created a human life - if you're going to toss away responsibility then don't stop at birth - be like Gordy and kill 'em at any age, right ?
And you answer none, which says a lot about you, your lack of credibility, and the inherent weakness of your argument.you ask a lot of questions
Obvioys Projection. Especially given the hysterics evident in your posts.you sound emotional today
why just the woman? why can't a hospital say "hey, that's not a living human, we've not spending money on that !" (its not valuable) why can't our judicial system just realize when there is a murder of a pregnant woman its just one - why have penalties for killing a non alive, not valuable unborn? Every law we have protect the unborn doesn't it ? except one
because she chose actions that created a human life - if you're going to toss away responsibility then don't stop at birth - be like Gordy and kill 'em at any age, right ?
people ? we're talking unborn's who have no value, no rights that don't deserve anything from anybodyWe've been thru this before. We dont withhold safer medical treatment from people for having accidents while participating in legal, socially acceptable activities. Like skiing or driving. Do we? Yes or no?
killing innocent human life is wrongIf you want to claim abortion is different, you'll have to demonstrate that abortion is wrong. Which...you havent. And the majority of Americans, the Const/SCOTUS, and the Universal Declaration I posted all indicate a huge number of people on Earth dont believe it is.
people ? we're talking unborn's who have no value, no rights that don't deserve anything from anybody
absolutely "withhold" if it saves a hospital money - there isn't any reason to "give" ... the unborn isn't valuable is it ? I mean .. unless you think it is ??
killing innocent human life is wrong
we don't kill because someone is poor, has a disability, is the wrong color of skin ... we don't kill them because they're in the way or because they keep someone from doing something ... I think you'll agree there are very few places on the planet that allows killing of innocent living humans
an unborn baby is an innocent living human - that's a 100% fact - and its barbaric and should be banned everywhere
Roe is dead - never thought I'd see that in my life. Now, we have to work on children/schools, get a new generation of kids to value human life so when they grow up and replace the people of the Roe generation, they'll do better and ban killing unborn life once and for all
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?