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!
See previous statement!
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!
Yet you cannot explain your position in the least!
You still haven't explained how that is relevant!
In other words, you have nothing! Got it!
You still haven't explained why!
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!
how do you define "conception" ?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.
I explained why abortion should not be restricted in the least. Thats the argument i made. You haven't explained the value of life or what biology has to do with abortion, which is the argumentyou made. Instead, you try to weasel out of explaining yourself and your assertions when challenged, which you are doing right now again, and which is both cowardly and dishonest. It's hilarious how you need to try to obviously bait someone into making your argument for you, since yours is so weak and pitiful that you can't even make or explain it yourself!but you don't have to explain anything
aint that something? No Gordy, you don't get to play that game with me. You want to tell everyone why you don't value human life? do it - I double dog dare you to do the very thing you demand of me
but you're not going to, and you and I both know it
Explain what's wrong with it and wrong according to whom or what authority!so laws/legal doesn't matter ? I need to know if what legal/lawful has any impact on what you think is right/wrong relative to having an unborn baby killed please
I don't remember that? it has nothing to do with legal/laws ... I've already proven that's irrelevantI explained why abortion should not be restricted in the least.
Thats the argument i made. You haven't explained the value of life or what biology has to do with abortion, which is the argumentyou made. Instead, you try to weasel out of explaining yourself and your assertions when challenged, which you are doing right now again, and which is both cowardly and dishonest. It's hilarious how you need to try to obviously bait someone into making your argument for you, since yours is so weak and pitiful that you can't even make or explain it yourself!
So, what is the value of human life? What does biology have to do with abortion? Both are your arguments! Go ahead and answer! I triple dog dare you! But I know you'll resort to your typical cowardly deflections and disingenuously try to turn the argument around since your merely talking a BS failed argument which you can't even make!
Explain what's wrong with it and wrong according to whom or what authority!
I don't remember that? it has nothing to do with legal/laws ... I've already proven that's irrelevant
That's it then ? Human life has no value to you thus abortion should be ok ?
that's your explanation ?
its killing an innocent human life - that's wrong
we don't allow killing children because they're poor, infants because they get in the way, newborns because they are costing money .......... we don't allow any of that because its wrong .. if an unborn child is irrelevant, why do we force insurances to pay for the unborn's healthcare? why do we have laws protecting that unborn baby from harm? why hold the father accountable for the unborn?
your questions seem to be serious deep soul searching - questions you are unable to answer but demand others do
He has, dont lie. And if you cant look up conception or didnt learn it in grammar school, who's fault is that? Are you assuming he's inventing some odd counter-definition?
More questions and poor assumptions and you refuse to answer it yourself...and he asked you first. "What's your explanation" for your failure?
you deny to answer ......... its almost like you don't like the question because you cannot answer or ... you're afraid to make it know your real feelings maybe?
I mean how easy for both ya'll to answer "why is life valuable" and my, it would make me look really stupid because I was the only one not answering huh ?
we have many laws protecting the unborn - you know thatAn unborn human life? Who says? It's not like the unborn is the only one affected, so...who says?
Once again, children can be taken care of by anyone else...costs laid on others, removed from abuse, etc....including the state and do not endanger or harm anyone else by their very existence inside that someone.
So once again, your attempt at an analogy fails.
Um...thatall applies to you right now and has for many many pages.
(I have answered what asked you, many times. I have provided detailed arguments both legal and moral. You have not. Saying something is wrong is a statement, not an argument.)
we have many laws protecting the unborn - you know that
not if laws doesn't matter to you, that's fine .... does religion matter to you? basic human morals/ethics? I mean if none of that is relevant in your world then nothing will ever be good enough to use to define a value of life for you or Gordy
OMG you'd place the burden on OTHER PEOPLE - how awful. All of the reasons to kill an innocent life just gets shifted to someone else.
But a woman simply goes through 9 months of pregnancy and gives the baby up and you're right - someone else can take care of it. Done. Lets do that, I agree
1 minute after birth baby is the same as 1 minute before
1 minute before is same as 1 day before
1 day before is same living unborn at 2 days before
keep going .... its the same living unborn and abortion kills it
why should we allow abortion again ? same living human life .....
no you have not and neither has Gordy, not that I ever remember
never once have ya'll defined the value of life - c'mon, stop playing those games
How convenient for you.I don't remember that?
Where? Cite your post! And yes, I used law to argue that position.it has nothing to do with legal/laws ... I've already proven that's irrelevant
Still waiting on that explanation of the "value" of human life! Until you provide that, any assertion of value is meaningless!That's it then ? Human life has no value to you thus abortion should be ok ?
that's your explanation ?
Says who? By what authority? Innocent of what exactly? Has it been charged with a crime or something? I could easily argue more effectively that it is "guilty" rather than make some empty declaration.its killing an innocent human life - that's wrong
They're born individuals with established constitutional rights and recognition as persons. THe unborn are not. And yes, kids are expensive. Abortion is way cheaper.we don't allow killing children because they're poor, infants because they get in the way, newborns because they are costing money .......... we don't allow any of that because its wrong ..
The care is also for the pregnant woman. What happens to the gestational parasite also affects her health.if an unborn child is irrelevant, why do we force insurances to pay for the unborn's healthcare?
We shouldn't. I disagree with those laws.why do we have laws protecting that unborn baby from harm? why hold the father accountable for the unborn?
No, my questions are simple and a direct response to your assertions. Your deflection and inability to answer them is noted.your questions seem to be serious deep soul searching - questions you are unable to answer but demand others do
How do you define or explain value? By what measurement? You have never explaned the "value of life." What is this "value? Asked again for the umpteenth time.not if laws doesn't matter to you, that's fine .... does religion matter to you? basic human morals/ethics? I mean if none of that is relevant in your world then nothing will ever be good enough to use to define a value of life for you or Gordy
So you admit neonates and children are a burden? That's the one thing you said that is true. They are a burden, on both the parent/s and possibly society. That is undeniable. It is also true that abortion is much cheaper, both in the short and long term.OMG you'd place the burden on OTHER PEOPLE - how awful. All of the reasons to kill an innocent life just gets shifted to someone else.
That is entirely her choice to make. She does not have to have her body used for gestation against her will.But a woman simply goes through 9 months of pregnancy and gives the baby up and you're right - someone else can take care of it. Done. Lets do that, I agree
False!1 minute after birth baby is the same as 1 minute before
False!1 minute before is same as 1 day before
False!1 day before is same living unborn at 2 days before
So what?keep going .... its the same living unborn and abortion kills it
Same flawed argument.why should we allow abortion again ? same living human life .....
Explain why we should define the value of life for you when is it neither our assertion or argument? It's yours! It's like you need us to make your argument for you because you are clearly incapable of doing it yourself! This continous dancing around that fact and posed questions to your assertions only shows it is you playing games! You're fooling no one here!no you have not and neither has Gordy, not that I ever remember
never once have ya'll defined the value of life - c'mon, stop playing those games
I can't speak for them though, If indeed Gordy, Lursa or I personally hold value for the unborn.... it's irrelevant. The issue is the relative value a pregnant woman holds in relation to her choice to abort is the issue at hand. My value, your value nor anyone else's cannot be forced onto the fetus inside of her.but you don't have to explain anything
aint that something? No Gordy, you don't get to play that game with me. You want to tell everyone why you don't value human life? do it - I double dog dare you to do the very thing you demand of me
but you're not going to, and you and I both know it
Whoa skippy.but you don't have to explain anything
aint that something? No Gordy, you don't get to play that game with me. You want to tell everyone why you don't value human life? do it - I double dog dare you to do the very thing you demand of me
but you're not going to, and you and I both know it
That's 100% wrong. You OTOH, just declared the children as burdens on society. Me: I recognize that abortion helps reduce that. You are very confused.
And it cant be predicted and many times it cannot be prevented.
Your memory is exceedingly poor then. Or you are lying out of convenience.
And Gordy asked you first so feel free to provide the 'value of life.'
when you said if abortion was banned tomorrow you'd not change your views to follow legal/lawful. If that's true then its also not why you are pro-abortion todayWhere? Cite your post! And yes, I used law to argue that position.
so if the laws changed that unborns were granted the same - you'd change to ?They're born individuals with established constitutional rights and recognition as persons. THe unborn are not. And yes, kids are expensive. Abortion is way cheaper.
every woman on here who's had children should be highly offended you'd say that - its a horrible thing to say IMOThe care is also for the pregnant woman. What happens to the gestational parasite also affects her health.
Explain why we should define the value of life for you when is it neither our assertion or argument? It's yours! It's like you need us to make your argument for you because you are clearly incapable of doing it yourself! This continous dancing around that fact and posed questions to your assertions only shows it is you playing games! You're fooling no one here!
Whoa skippy.
You are the one that brought up value of life as your argument..
It’s YOUR responsibility to explain and defend your premise.
So explain what the value is of a one day old baby.
Again :
So explain why a day old baby is valuable.
Explain its value.
Specify where i ever said that!when you said if abortion was banned tomorrow you'd not change your views to follow legal/lawful.
What's "pro-abortion?" THat's another question I asked which you avoided.If that's true then its also not why you are pro-abortion today
No, I did not say. I use the law to argue my position, as the law somewhat agrees with it. But it is not the only basis of my argument.if legal/lawful is WHY you are pro-abortion then if the laws changed, so would your view. Did you not say you'd not change ?
More 'what-ifs?' Is that the best you can do?so if the laws changed that unborns were granted the same - you'd change to ?
Your feelings mean nothing to me!every woman on here who's had children should be highly offended you'd say that - its a horrible thing to say IMO
As I suspected, you have nothing to explain. Just typical cowardly deflections and BS!no
you demand such a thing from me? you go first
"Value of life" is asserted by you.this goes back many many threads - "value of life" is demanded by Gordy
not me
It's more fact than opinion.that was echoing your opinion and Gordy's, never mine (context matters)
When they're not, or when protection fails, abortion fixes that. After al, pencils have erasers to fix mistakes.you'd think because of that, people would be really careful when they have sex
You did bring it up first. It's the basis of your entire argument and a point you repeat ad nauseum. Yet you never explained what this "value of life" is.I think you're right - though he'll say over and over I brought it up first. Its as if he doesn't know what the value of life is.
You made the assertion of value. So yes, the burden is on you to explain yourself or articulate your position. The fact yo avoid doing that and try to get others to explain your argument for you only shows how weak your position truly is and how you lack any real credibility here.so is that where we're at? the burden on debatepolitics.com is on me, solely on me, to prove a value of life and if I don't that justifies killing anyone at any time if they're in the way, an inconvenience, etc is what pro-abortion seems to be saying. remember - I've already proven legal/laws don't matter - so what DOES matter is the question and pro-abortion people can answer that too
Gordy won't say, pro-abortion people won't say .... that's fascinating
you'd think because of that, people would be really careful when they have sex
I think you're right - though he'll say over and over I brought it up first. Its as if he doesn't know what the value of life is.
so is that where we're at? the burden on debatepolitics.com is on me, solely on me, to prove a value of life and if I don't that justifies killing anyone at any time if they're in the way, an inconvenience, etc is what pro-abortion seems to be saying. remember - I've already proven legal/laws don't matter - so what DOES matter is the question and pro-abortion people can answer that too
Gordy won't say, pro-abortion people won't say .... that's fascinating
I'd say because all his talk about "value of life" is nothing more than sanctimonious BS. If he really believed the tripe he spews, he would explain it or defend his assertion. But as we've seen repeatedly, it's just cowardly deflections when pressed.Yes it's on you...so why wont you answer it?
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?