• 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!

I'm Pro-Life: Change My Mind

Nathan.22 said:
The reason I am Pro life is because I believe that the termination of an innocent human life is of course horrible and that is a moral stance we all should have, so the question is when does life begin? if we want to determine whether abortions should be illegal or not this is the most important question. Me personally, I believe that life begins at conception which is why I'm pro life. I'm interested in hearing other people's opposing positions.
Click to expand...
Aren't you glad you are a man and will never have make that decision of face the consequences of it? It sure makes it an easy choice doesn't it? BTW 2/3rds of fertilized eggs do not result in a child and I am not talking about abortions either. Perhaps you should mourn for all those "babies" instead of the few that are aborted by women. Don't they deserve your sympathy?

Two-thirds of all human embryos fail to develop successfully. Now, in a new study, researchers have shown that they can predict with 93 percent certainty which fertilized eggs will make it to a critical developmental milestone and which will stall and die.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releas...-thirds of all human,which will stall and die.
 
Last edited:
screenwriter said:
I've answered everything. We agree abortion ends the life cycle of another random human. I see that as devolving because it takes us back to animal behavior.
Click to expand...

Actually in the wild animals will often spontaneously abort or prevent implantation during times of high environmental stress like famine, drought or habitat destruction that are not conducive to gestating and raising young. Preserving the female of the species, not the fetus, allows for reproduction when the young have a chance of living. This is a species preservation action. The same general principle applies to abortion in the human species. The only difference is that humans with their very high ability to analyze a situation, make a conscious decision that the time is not conducive to raising a child.

Spontaneous abortion in animals and induced abortion in humans are species preservation actions, essentially keeping the herd physically healthy in animals, mentally healthy in humans.
 
Scrabaholic said:
Incorrect. Choicers know that the zef is genetically human.
Click to expand...

So they proclaim loud and proud that the methods and intent of abortions are aimed at ending human life?

Link?
 
You've got the right outlook, why look to change it.
 
code1211 said:
So they proclaim loud and proud that the methods and intent of abortions are aimed at ending human life?
Click to expand...
Every pro-choice advocate knows that abortion ends the life of a potential person. That's why we take abortion seriously, don't lie about it, and try to support the things that will reduce the number of abortions.
 
Scrabaholic said:
Oh, good grief.
Click to expand...

One of the various approaches used by the Pro-Choice folks is to stress that the Aborted "zef", "zygot" or whatever other de-humanizing word is used is not really a person.

I happen to be a proponent of Abortion on demand due to societal considerations, but the intentional de-humanizing of the life to be aborted is not a good thing for our society. It's essential, but not good.

Every human life is a bit or a lot different than all the rest. Really awe inspiring. It's all based in whole or in part on the first, single stand of DNA in that first, single cell. Again, really awe inspiring.
 
code1211 said:
One of the various approaches used by the Pro-Choice folks is to stress that the Aborted "zef", "zygot" or whatever other de-humanizing word is used is not really a person.

I happen to be a proponent of Abortion on demand due to societal considerations, but the intentional de-humanizing of the life to be aborted is not a good thing for our society. It's essential, but not good.

Every human life is a bit or a lot different than all the rest. Really awe inspiring. It's all based in whole or in part on the first, single stand of DNA in that first, single cell. Again, really awe inspiring.
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't see anything "awe inspiring" about it. It is basic biology.

Nobody is dehumanizing the zef. Everyone knows it's genetically human. It is FACT that it is not a person until live birth.
 
weaver2 said:
Every pro-choice advocate knows that abortion ends the life of a potential person. That's why we take abortion seriously, don't lie about it, and try to support the things that will reduce the number of abortions.
Click to expand...

I support the things that make Abortions available, safe and rare.

Removing the notion of humanity from the identification of the unborn is a deceptive characterization of the thing that is being done.

If we are to end human life, it needs to be done with reverence and solemnity with full acceptance and knowledge of the nature of the thing being done.

Society endorses the ending of human life in various places and situations and this is one of them.

Endorsing the sanctity of human life in most considerations while allowing for the occasional need to end human life is appropriate. The very heavy burden this bestows is tragic when it occurs to those we force to bear it.
 
code1211 said:
I support the things that make Abortions available, safe and rare.
Removing the notion of humanity from the identification of the unborn is a deceptive characterization of the thing that is being done.
If we are to end human life, it needs to be done with reverence and solemnity with full acceptance and knowledge of the nature of the thing being done.
Society endorses the ending of human life in various places and situations and this is one of them.
Endorsing the sanctity of human life in most considerations while allowing for the occasional need to end human life is appropriate. The very heavy burden this bestows is tragic when it occurs to those we force to bear it.
Click to expand...

That seem sensible.
 
It’s up to you to change your mind and see things how they really are and express empathy.
 
Bored in the USA said:
It’s up to you to change your mind and see things how they really are and express empathy.
Click to expand...
I'd be willing forego empathy from anti-abortion advocates in exchange for acknowledging that in the US women have the same right to make personal decisions about their private lives without religious interference as do men
 
Scrabaholic said:
Personally, I don't see anything "awe inspiring" about it. It is basic biology.

Nobody is dehumanizing the zef. Everyone knows it's genetically human. It is FACT that it is not a person until live birth.
Click to expand...

You are crossing a line between biology and legality in your consideration in just these few words of response.

This is the tool and tactic of the Pro-Choice folks.

It's legal and very likely societally beneficial to evict an elderly lady from her home of 70 years, condemned in a process of eminent domain in order to build a highway.

Is it the best thing for HER? Is it morally right to her?

I consider abortion to be both a societal necessity and the ending of a human life. I don't see why, or even how, Pro-Choicers do not.

In using euphemisms like zef, zygote and the most reprehensible, tissue mass, the de-humanization is promoted. Dehumanizing humans usually leads to bad things.
 
code1211 said:
You are crossing a line between biology and legality in your consideration in just these few words of response.

This is the tool and tactic of the Pro-Choice folks.

It's legal and very likely societally beneficial to evict an elderly lady from her home of 70 years, condemned in a process of eminent domain in order to build a highway.

Is it the best thing for HER? Is it morally right to her?

I consider abortion to be both a societal necessity and the ending of a human life. I don't see why, or even how, Pro-Choicers do not.

In using euphemisms like zef, zygote and the most reprehensible, tissue mass, the de-humanization is promoted. Dehumanizing humans usually leads to bad things.
Click to expand...


LOL! Surely you jest. Abortion is termination of pregnancy. Eminent domain is not abortion.

YOU said that reproduction is awe inspiring. I was responding to that. Do try to keep up, k?
 
Deuce said:
A drop of my blood is genetically human. In fact, it is genetically me.

That doesn't make it a person.
Click to expand...

How many times do the cells in that drop of your blood replicate?
 
code1211 said:
You are crossing a line between biology and legality in your consideration in just these few words of response.

This is the tool and tactic of the Pro-Choice folks.

It's legal and very likely societally beneficial to evict an elderly lady from her home of 70 years, condemned in a process of eminent domain in order to build a highway.

Is it the best thing for HER? Is it morally right to her?

I consider abortion to be both a societal necessity and the ending of a human life. I don't see why, or even how, Pro-Choicers do not.

In using euphemisms like zef, zygote and the most reprehensible, tissue mass, the de-humanization is promoted. Dehumanizing humans usually leads to bad things.
Click to expand...
To be clear........YOU are a pro choicer
 
code1211 said:
How many times do the cells in that drop of your blood replicate?
Click to expand...

So the cells that produce the blood cells, those are people?
 
code1211 said:
I support the things that make Abortions available, safe and rare.

Removing the notion of humanity from the identification of the unborn is a deceptive characterization of the thing that is being done.

If we are to end human life, it needs to be done with reverence and solemnity with full acceptance and knowledge of the nature of the thing being done.

Society endorses the ending of human life in various places and situations and this is one of them.

Endorsing the sanctity of human life in most considerations while allowing for the occasional need to end human life is appropriate. The very heavy burden this bestows is tragic when it occurs to those we force to bear it.
Click to expand...
So explain how an accurate description of the stage that life is in dehumanizes that life?

Or you could explain how an inaccurate description of that life, ie. referring to the unborn as a baby, does anything more than be an emotional plea?
 
Scrabaholic said:
Personally, I don't see anything "awe inspiring" about it. It is basic biology.

Nobody is dehumanizing the zef. Everyone knows it's genetically human. It is FACT that it is not a person until live birth.
Click to expand...
You'll note that he ignored my post 808...he has no rebuttal so it seems he just prefers not to concede.
​
"Because there's no authority that 'all Americans' are obligated to follow that says that scientific fact = a recognition of a right to life.​
​
Science is objective...it applies no value, no rights, nada. Biologically, 'science' doesnt differentiate between tiger DNA, human DNA, frog DNA in value or importance or right to life. It's merely a categorization for identifying species.​
​
This one rarely gets a serious response. But hey, if there is an authority that Americans are obligated to follow that says the unborn have a right to life based on DNA? I'd love to hear about it."​

Otherwise, it just seems that he's emotionally wrapped up in some mysticism of 'human life' being more special than other animal life. 🤷 That's a subjective human concept...has nothing to do with science.
 
code1211 said:
In using euphemisms like zef, zygote and the most reprehensible, tissue mass, the de-humanization is promoted. Dehumanizing humans usually leads to bad things.
Click to expand...
There we have it. The heart of the problem, your understanding of the english language is abysmal. ( That means really bad) .

Neither of those two are euphemisms. Zef is an acronym (zygote, embryo, fetus.) While zygote is an actual word in its own right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom