• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Can pro life defend their position

stealthycat said:
you don't care about legal/lawful

I know it, you know it

so where is your beliefs/views rooted? feelings? religion ?
Click to expand...
Again, belief is irrelevant. You seem hung up on that, and on biology. Even though you can't explain what it has to do with abortion.
 
Gordy327 said:
Again, belief is irrelevant. You seem hung up on that, and on biology. Even though you can't explain what it has to do with abortion.
Click to expand...

so if belief doesn't drive why you are so pro-abortion
if laws/legal are not the pillars of why you are pro-abortion


why are you pro-abortion at all ?
 
stealthycat said:
I did answer you
Click to expand...
No you didn't.
You can't defend the notion that at the point of conception a mere fertilized egg physically equates to the physicality of a neonate. Instead you insist upon an emotionally ridiculous scenario far beyond this inception point where an embryo is a mere minute from birth. Your argument seems solely reliant upon the emotional vehemence of this physical depiction and as such is rendered non-persuasive.
stealthycat said:
so don't say anything about law/legal anymore - it has no bearing whatsoever on how you view life - if it did, you'd go with whatever was legal/lawful
Click to expand...
I am.
Birth is legally acknowledged as the commencement of personhood.
 
yes I did when you asked if I opposed abortion at one minute prior to birth and I said "and no - I'm against abortion once a normal pregnancy begins - at that point, 100% without a doubt/nobody can argue - there is a living human unborn in the womb. 100% biological fact"


quip said:
I am.
Birth is legally acknowledged as the commencement of personhood.
Click to expand...

so what? if you went with what was legal and lawful and the laws changed to recognize unborn as personhood, you'd not change your views on abortion would you ?
 
No, that was a deflection.

Is a newly conceived ovum the physical equivalent to a neonate? Yes? or No?
stealthycat said:
so what? if you went with what was legal and lawful and the laws changed to recognize unborn as personhood, you'd not change your views on abortion would you ?
Click to expand...
No. As their personhood status would naturally conflict with the mother's. As she has the moral right to expel any such person(s) from trespassing upon her's, any official designation of "unborn personhood" (in the case of abortion) is rendered redundant.
 
quip said:
No, that was a deflection.
Is a newly conceived ovum the physical equivalent to a neonate? Yes? or No?
Click to expand...
if the woman is normal pregnant (not ectopic etc) there is a baby - there has to be, there is a pregnancy

if you want to discuss BEFORE that we can but it doesn't have anything to do with abortion


so what is legal/law is irrelevant to you and I figured it was

so you can't use legal/lawful as a pillar to your belief as you will not follow it when it goes against what you want
 
stealthycat said:
if the woman is normal pregnant (not ectopic etc) there is a baby - there has to be, there is a pregnancy

if you want to discuss BEFORE that we can but it doesn't have anything to do with abortion
Click to expand...
It has everything to do with abortion.
If you can't defend your rhetoric at the beginning of the process you certainly fail at any subsequent rhetoric.
stealthycat said:
so what is legal/law is irrelevant to you and I figured it was

so you can't use legal/lawful as a pillar to your belief as you will not follow it when it goes against what you want
Click to expand...
It's redundancy speaks for itself.
 
stealthycat said:
so if belief doesn't drive why you are so pro-abortion
if laws/legal are not the pillars of why you are pro-abortion


why are you pro-abortion at all ?
Click to expand...
What is "pro-abortion?" Why don't you answer my question first before asking more of your own!
 
stealthycat said:
if the woman is normal pregnant (not ectopic etc) there is a baby - there has to be, there is a pregnancy
Click to expand...
No, there is no baby. Only a ZEF. No baby (neonate) until birth. That's been explained to you before too.
stealthycat said:
if you want to discuss BEFORE that we can but it doesn't have anything to do with abortion
Click to expand...
What does biology have to do with abortion?
What is the value of life?
You have repeatedly avoided answering those questions!
 
quip said:
It has everything to do with abortion.
If you can't defend your rhetoric at the beginning of the process you certainly fail at any subsequent rhetoric.
Click to expand...
there isn't a pregnancy - you cannot have an abortion if there isn't a pregnancy


quip said:
It's redundancy speaks for itself.
Click to expand...

no, you are wrong to use the law as a pillar to your views IF you're not going to follow the law unless it mirror's your belief .... nope, can't do it.

its like being a Christian except you don't want to follow 6 of the 10 commandments - guess what? not Christian
 
stealthycat said:
what? you don't think biology matters?




so a 1 day old baby .... biology has nothing to do with it being protected from being killed ?
Click to expand...

Question after question after question. Dodge after dodge after dodge.

You havent been able to make a cogent argument here yet.
 
Lursa said:
Question after question after question. Dodge after dodge after dodge.

You havent been able to make a cogent argument here yet.
Click to expand...

as do you
as does Gordy

that's ok ... but be honest
 
stealthycat said:
you ask a lot of questions and answer none and I won't play your game anymore
Click to expand...
More cowardly deflection as expected. It just proves you're talking FOS! I answered far more of your questions than you have with mine. Especially since I asked relatively few questions, such as: what is the value of human life and what does biology havevto do with abortion judgements? You have yet to address those. So the only one playing games hee ris you and everyone can see it too!
 

do some soul searching if you do not understand Human life has value - in fact, create a poll and ask people " does human life have value" yes or no

I dare you - you'll find everyone does
 
stealthycat said:
as do you
as does Gordy

that's ok ... but be honest
Click to expand...

Nope...I've asked you who says abortion is wrong/what authority that Americans are obligated to follow, etc since the start.

And Gordy has asked you what the value of human life is, since you constantly accuse others of not doing so. And you havent answered.

So dont lie...you've used questions to avoid making a reasoned argument the entire time.
 
Lursa said:
Nope...I've asked you who says abortion is wrong/what authority that Americans are obligated to follow, etc since the start.
Click to expand...
you're talking legal/lawful and those have changed throughout our history

or are you asking about spiritual wrong/right or religious authority or ??

Lursa said:
And Gordy has asked you what the value of human life is, since you constantly accuse others of not doing so. And you havent answered.
Click to expand...
Gordy doesn't value human life and I say that based on everything he's said and his refusal to define the value of life himself. Its MUCH harder to demand others define something - that's his catch 22

Lursa said:
So dont lie...you've used questions to avoid making a reasoned argument the entire time.
Click to expand...
as have you and Gordy

however I have always stayed consistent - read this again, memorize it, print it for future reference


if there is a normal pregnancy there HAS to be a living human female and a living human unborn - you can use whatever names you want to, call them kittens and puppies if you want, the words are irrelevant


that's it - simple.

we can allow those unborn living humans to be killed or not - I say not, just like I say don't kill them at 1 minute old, 1 day or 1 week or 1 month old. CONSISTENCY
 
stealthycat said:
you're talking legal/lawful and those have changed throughout our history

or are you asking about spiritual wrong/right or religious authority or ??
Click to expand...

I've said you can provide a legal or moral one anytime. And you do neither...so dont lie.

Not religious...it's ludicrous if you think you are entitled to demand women submit to your religious beliefs. Do you believe that you do, here in America?

stealthycat said:
Gordy doesn't value human life and I say that based on everything he's said and his refusal to define the value of life himself. Its MUCH harder to demand others define something - that's his catch 22
Click to expand...

Nonsense, and you still avoid it.

stealthycat said:
as have you and Gordy

however I have always stayed consistent - read this again, memorize it, print it for future reference
Click to expand...

Again, you make up crap about others because you cannot even present your own arguments.

stealthycat said:
if there is a normal pregnancy there HAS to be a living human female and a living human unborn - you can use whatever names you want to, call them kittens and puppies if you want, the words are irrelevant
Click to expand...

Dont care. Still not an argument, it's nothing more than your feelings or belief. Nobody cares...you cannot justify why anyone should even listen to that. You cannot articulate any value or legal or moral perspective. And all of those need to include the woman in the equation. "As long as she doesnt die" isnt remotely moral btw.

stealthycat said:
that's it - simple.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's definitely simple.

stealthycat said:
we can allow those unborn living humans to be killed or not - I say not, just like I say don't kill them at 1 minute old, 1 day or 1 week or 1 month old. CONSISTENCY
Click to expand...

Hitler was consistent too. Didnt make him right.
 


can you define the value of life ? what you and Gordy have so desperately demanded of me ?

I don't think you can nor can Gordy
 
stealthycat said:
do some soul searching if you do not understand Human life has value - in fact, create a poll and ask people " does human life have value" yes or no

I dare you - you'll find everyone does
Click to expand...
Spare me the platitude!
stealthycat said:
do some soul searching if you do not understand Human life has value - in fact, create a poll and ask people " does human life have value" yes or no

I dare you - you'll find everyone does
Click to expand...
Spare me the platitude! If you cannot explain your assertion of human value or what biology has to do with abortion, even though it's the basis of your entire argument, then it proof you have no rational argument to offer and are just talking FOS while cowardly deflecting!
 

you cannot answer the very thing you demand of others
 
stealthycat said:
can you define the value of life ? what you and Gordy have so desperately demanded of me ?

I don't think you can nor can Gordy
Click to expand...

 
stealthycat said:
can you define the value of life ? what you and Gordy have so desperately demanded of me ?

I don't think you can nor can Gordy
Click to expand...
You're the one making assertions of value and arguing it! So the burden is on you to explain your position! Why should we or anyone else define it when no one else is making such claims of value nor basing their arguments on it? Clearly you're just making an attempt at another cowardly deflection!
stealthycat said:
Gordy doesn't value human life and I say that based on everything he's said and his refusal to define the value of life himself. Its MUCH harder to demand others define something - that's his catch 22
Click to expand...
See previous statement!
stealthycat said:
as have you and Gordy
Click to expand...
Let's do a count then! I'll bet we;ve answered more of your questions than you have answered ours. You still haven't answered the initial question of what is the value of life, in this and in other similar threads. Neither have you explained what biology has to do with abortion. All you offfer is cowardice when challenged on it!
stealthycat said:
however I have always stayed consistent - read this again, memorize it, print it for future reference
Click to expand...
Yet you cannot explain your position in the least!
stealthycat said:
if there is a normal pregnancy there HAS to be a living human female and a living human unborn - you can use whatever names you want to, call them kittens and puppies if you want, the words are irrelevant
Click to expand...
You still haven't explained how that is relevant!
stealthycat said:
that's it - simple.
Click to expand...
In other words, you have nothing! Got it!
stealthycat said:
we can allow those unborn living humans to be killed or not - I say not, just like I say don't kill them at 1 minute old, 1 day or 1 week or 1 month old. CONSISTENCY
Click to expand...
You still haven't explained why!
stealthycat said:
you cannot answer the very thing you demand of others
Click to expand...
Because I made no such assertion or argument regarding value or biology that requires explaining to begin with! Meanwhile, you have repeatedly and you have cowardly dodged challenges repeatedly!
 
stealthycat said:
there isn't a pregnancy - you cannot have an abortion if there isn't a pregnancy
Click to expand...
What?

At conception the woman has begun her pregnancy voyage.
It's called logic and reasoning. The law - in your silly hypothetical - is uselessly redundant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.