• 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!

Life begins at conception...

Status
Not open for further replies.
evanescence said:
Most would argue that a ZEF is human, but is not a person. There's the distinction.
Click to expand...

Yes, but that isn't what you said. I would agree with your above statement.
 
evanescence said:
Most would argue that a ZEF is human, but is not a person. There's the distinction.
Click to expand...

Most pro-choicers seem to think that one must be a person to be human...or as granny likes to point out "a human".
 
mac said:
You can go back in this thread alone and find at least thirty posts saying that a ZEF isn't human.
Click to expand...

I doubt that.

1Perry said:
Yes, but that isn't what you said. I would agree with your above statement.
Click to expand...

I have consistently argued this point. Stop lying. Is this how most pro lifers debate?
 
evanescence said:
I have consistently argued this point. Stop lying. Is this how most pro lifers debate?
Click to expand...

Sheesh...........

You said.

No one has ever said that a ZEF isn't human.

I said that wasn't true as there are examples right here.

You then said.

Most would argue that a ZEF is human, but is not a person. There's the distinction.

Which is different than what you initially said. I agreed with your second statement.

Now where is the problem?
 
mac said:
You can go back in this thread alone and find at least thirty posts saying that a ZEF isn't human.
Click to expand...

It's human, but it's not a human being. This seems to be a difference that most pro-lifers are incapable of grasping. Only an individual can be killed, and a ZEF is not an individual.
 
prometeus said:
Really? Which science discipline defines human being?

Have you ever taken a biology class?

So, now DNA alone makes a human being?

Nothing actually.

Oh so, no real rational argument so you resort to the slavery bit.

Insignificant life.

No, that is religious dogma and self contradicting one too.

Has it occurred to you that many people don;t care what you and your religion say?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I think you were talking to CathlicCrusader, but I'll respond anyway.

I think he's absolutely right about the fetus being human. But you dispute it and no matter how solid the proof, you always will. You see, I know you. I don't mean personally, but I know your attitude about this and I know that you're completely unconcerned about winning this debate, because you have the tools at hand to dispute anything. It's not necessary for you to win.

You're not by nature a dishonest person. I'm sure you're good to the people around you and you're probably well liked. But for this debate, keeping your opponents off balance and confused with misleading questions, such as "Which science discipline defines human being?" is important, and to accomplish this, you necessarily have to be dishonest.

There's a reason you're in support of abortion, and it's not out of concern for the young mother-to-be, her health, or for the plight of the unwanted newborn. And I know what that reason is.
 
1Perry said:
Well no, but the point is what society does.
Click to expand...
Yes society does what it has agreed to do and if agreed to then it is not an infringement on freedom.

You do support restrictions on others though. Right?
Click to expand...
Not outside the societal compact.

Tell that to the guy in prison for not paying his taxes.
Click to expand...
He did not play by the rules agreed to.
 
mac said:
I'm well aware that its humanity is of no consequence to you or other pro-choicer.
Click to expand...
Biological classification of one kind or another by itself does not warrant any greater significance. I value my dog more than some humans and at the same time would trade their lives or even mine for some other humans. It is a mater significance and as you well know society does not place any great significance on fetuses.

This attitude is why genocide and slavery are often compared to your view.
Click to expand...
Yes, failed and weak references in lieu of intelligent arguments, but you already know that.
 
RamFel said:
Sorry, but I think you were talking to CathlicCrusader, but I'll respond anyway.
Click to expand...
Thanks, but as it turns out you added nothing to the discussion but speculation.

I think he's absolutely right about the fetus being human.
Click to expand...
If you and he equate the human being to nothing more than a biological classification. There is a problem with that though, namely why only that classification is significant? There is not scientific explanation for that, which leaves to the conclusion that a "human being" is more than just a biological classification. I say that a fetus does not meet the "more" and that is why it is not a human being. Of course it has human DNA and it is a product of the human reproductive process, but it just is "not done yet" at that point.

But you dispute it and no matter how solid the proof, you always will.
Click to expand...
I have yet to see any solid proof the goes beyond the biological classification, which I have never denied.

You see, I know you.
Click to expand...
Actually you do not, you may thinik, but you do not.

I know that you're completely unconcerned about winning this debate
Click to expand...
This debate, you are right, winning not only do I not seek it, it is not winnable. However the issue, the continued availability of safe and legal abortions in the first trimester is something I care about, not because I or anyone close to me may need it, but because making abortion illegal represents a repression of freedom and self determination. It amounts to nothing more than morality coercion and we all know from experience how well that has failed and how much "bad" it resulted in, when prohibition was tried.

But for this debate, keeping your opponents off balance and confused with misleading questions, such as "Which science discipline defines human being?" is important, and to accomplish this, you necessarily have to be dishonest.
Click to expand...
If those who have opposite views are kept of balance by that, I submit they are not equipped for intellectual undertaking of thins nature.

There's a reason you're in support of abortion, and it's not out of concern for the young mother-to-be, her health, or for the plight of the unwanted newborn. And I know what that reason is.
Click to expand...
Don't just claim to now, tell us so we can see if you know.
 
prometeus said:
Yes society does what it has agreed to do and if agreed to then it is not an infringement on freedom.
Click to expand...

Fine, if we ban abortion it won't be an infringement on freedom.
 
atrasicarius said:
It's human, but it's not a human being. This seems to be a difference that most pro-lifers are incapable of grasping. Only an individual can be killed, and a ZEF is not an individual.
Click to expand...

Which means absolutely squat. It's simply additional subjective criteria. A human is the offspring of two humans.
 
prometeus said:
Biological classification of one kind or another by itself does not warrant any greater significance. I value my dog more than some humans and at the same time would trade their lives or even mine for some other humans. It is a mater significance and as you well know society does not place any great significance on fetuses.

Yes, failed and weak references in lieu of intelligent arguments, but you already know that.
Click to expand...

neener-neener
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom