Can pro life defend their position

[Gordy327]

you don't care about legal/lawful

I know it, you know it

so where is your beliefs/views rooted? feelings? religion ?

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.

 

[stealthycat]

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.

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 ?

 

[quip]

I did answer you

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.

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

I am.
Birth is legally acknowledged as the commencement of personhood.

 

[stealthycat]

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.

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"

I am.
Birth is legally acknowledged as the commencement of personhood.

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 ?

 

[quip]

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"

No, that was a deflection.

Is a newly conceived ovum the physical equivalent to a neonate? Yes? or No?

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. 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.

 

[stealthycat]

No, that was a deflection.
Is a newly conceived ovum the physical equivalent to a neonate? Yes? or No?

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

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.

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

 

[quip]

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

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.

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

It's redundancy speaks for itself.

 

[Gordy327]

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 ?

What is "pro-abortion?" Why don't you answer my question first before asking more of your own!

 

[Gordy327]

if the woman is normal pregnant (not ectopic etc) there is a baby - there has to be, there is a pregnancy

No, there is no baby. Only a ZEF. No baby (neonate) until birth. That's been explained to you before too.

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

What does biology have to do with abortion?
What is the value of life?
You have repeatedly avoided answering those questions!

 

[stealthycat]

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.

there isn't a pregnancy - you cannot have an abortion if there isn't a pregnancy

It's redundancy speaks for itself.

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]

????????????????????????????????????????????????

you ask a lot of questions and answer none and I won't play your game anymore

 

[Lursa]

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 ?

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

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

 

[stealthycat]

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

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

as do you
as does Gordy

that's ok ... but be honest

 

[Gordy327]

you ask a lot of questions and answer none and I won't play your game anymore

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!

 

[Gordy327]

as do you
as does Gordy

that's ok ... but be honest

You first!

 

[stealthycat]

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

 

[Lursa]

as do you
as does Gordy

that's ok ... but be honest

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.

 

[stealthycat]

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

you're talking legal/lawful and those have changed throughout our history

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

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.

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

So dont lie...you've used questions to avoid making a reasoned argument the entire time.

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

 

[Lursa]

you're talking legal/lawful and those have changed throughout our history

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

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?

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

Nonsense, and you still avoid it.

as have you and Gordy

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

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

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

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.

that's it - simple.

Yes, it's definitely 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

Hitler was consistent too. Didnt make him right.

 

[stealthycat]

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?


Nonsense, and you still avoid it.


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


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.

Yes, it's definitely simple.


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

 

[Gordy327]

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

Spare me the platitude!

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

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!

 

[stealthycat]

Spare me the platitude!
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

 

[Lursa]

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

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.

 

[Gordy327]

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

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!

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

See previous statement!

as have you and Gordy

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!

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

Yet you cannot explain your position in the least!

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

You still haven't explained how that is relevant!

that's it - simple.

In other words, you have nothing! Got it!

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

You still haven't explained why!

you cannot answer the very thing you demand of others

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!

 

[quip]

there isn't a pregnancy - you cannot have an abortion if there isn't a pregnancy

What?

At conception the woman has begun her pregnancy voyage.

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

It's called logic and reasoning. The law - in your silly hypothetical - is uselessly redundant.