Jump to content

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Scout said:

Building catches on fire.  You have a choice of ONE SINGLE thing you may save from the blaze and ONLY one thing. 

1.  A 2 year old toddler, OR

2. A locked fridge with 10 fertilized eggs in it. 

 

Which will you save from the flames? 

How many Republicans will refuse to answer?  :lol:

 

The question is ridiculous but I'll answer it. Of course, everyone would save the toddler. But you've constructed a scenario where there's only one correct answer. The reason is that fertilized eggs are lost all the time due to failure to implant. 50% of naturally fertilized eggs are lost naturally. While it contains unique DNA and has already begun the journey to become a person, no one would value them over a toddler. So, the question is disingenuous on its face.

 

A question that better illustrates the value of the object of discussion, the fetus, and one that more honestly presents a true dilemma, would be:

 

Building catches on fire. You have a choice of ONE thing to save:

 

1. A woman, OR

2. Her twin, who is 8 months pregnant.

 

Which will you save from the flames? 

How many librejects will refuse to answer? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Scout said:

Told you she would refuse to answer.  EVERYBODY knows that it is QUITE germane to the question of abortion - morally and legally.

 

Actually, it's not germane. My question is MUCH more relevant to the fate of the fetus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DemoMan said:

It most certainly has to do with your lie that fertilized eggs are equal to living children.  No surprise that you want to run away and avoid answering the question, but grow a ball for once, coward.

ANSWER THE QUESTION.

 

No one said a cell was the same as a person you lying whore.

 

I did answer the question, you putrid stench.

 

Now answer my question, you pathetic glob of cells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Scout said:

 

 

Told you she would refuse to answer.  EVERYBODY knows that it is QUITE germane to the question of abortion - morally and legally.

MY answer to the question is that I would save the 2 year old baby.  Now answer my question.  What does this have to do with abortion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DemoMan said:

 

She did nothing of the kind, lying whore.  It is a hypothetical, meant to expose your bullshit propaganda and lies.  it's going to work, too.

 

 

This is a marginal example, as less than 2% of abortions are performed because of rape

 

6 hours ago, DemoMan said:

Lie about what the other person has said, to try to evade answering, as you are so clumsily trying to do here?  Yes,  you WILL lose this argument.

What SPECIFICALLY did I "lie" about this time?:glare:

 

6 hours ago, DemoMan said:

No, coward - no trying to change the subject.   Answer the question, coward.

Answer my questions.  Idiot.

 

 

6 hours ago, DemoMan said:

 

It most certainly has to do with your lie that fertilized eggs are equal to living children.  No surprise that you want to run away and avoid answering the question, but grow a ball for once, coward.

ANSWER THE QUESTION.

I already answered the question, and I never said that fertilized eggs were equal to children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jrobin15283 said:

MY answer to the question is that I would save the 2 year old baby.  Now answer my question.  What does this have to do with abortion?

 

Abortion and those blastocysts in the fridge are both early stages of gestation.  You yourself acknowledge that one is less significant than the other. 

 

Well, it is the same with people that abort. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Scout said:

 

Abortion and those blastocysts in the fridge are both early stages of gestation.  You yourself acknowledge that one is less significant than the other. 

 

Well, it is the same with people that abort. 

The difference between this scenario and people that abort are that nobody is faced with that dilemma when they have an abortion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jrobin15283 said:

So now you result to using a marginal case to represent all cases of possible abortion.  People mostly do this when they realize they are losing an argument.  Once you agree that abortion after 10 weeks is wrong, then we will talk about cases of rape and incest.

Once you agree that cases of rape and incest are "special" and i THOSE cases the fetus doesn't have rights equal to or superior to the mother, you're fucked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jrobin15283 said:

This has nothing to do with abortion.  You continue to deflect from the real argument, which is the taking of human lives, which is wrong.  

As is smoking cigarettes. 

 

How far are you willing to go to control women and force them to "do the right thing?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jrobin15283 said:

The difference between this scenario and people that abort are that nobody is faced with that dilemma when they have an abortion.

True, but still not pertinent in the question of whether you too agree that fetuses or blastocysts are a less significant form of life. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Scout said:

True, but still not pertinent in the question of whether you too agree that fetuses or blastocysts are a less significant form of life. 

It is obvious that I believe that they are less in this scenario.  But what is your point here?  This has nothing to do with abortion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jrobin15283 said:

Do you admit that abortion after 10 weeks is wrong?

I consider abortion wrong. And smoking cigarettes. 

 

And I consider EVERY fetus a human being - whatever stage of development that human being might be in.

 

And I consider the RIGHTS of that human being to be extremely important and necessary to protect - and most states DO protect those rights.

 

But under current law (and natural law), those rights ARE IN FACT subordinate to the rights of the woman carrying that fetus. 

 

No one else on earth has the right to terminate a human fetus, than the woman who is carrying it. The doctor who assists in that is operating as an agent of that woman, and not as his own agant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Scout said:

True, but still not pertinent in the question of whether you too agree that fetuses or blastocysts are a less significant form of life. 

If you were in a burning building and would save only ONE OF THE TWO, would you save the:

 

- 6 month old toddler,  or the

 

- 10 year old baby?

 

IMAGINE HOW MANY LIBERALS WILL REFUSE TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION!! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jrobin15283 said:

If you were in a burning building and would save only ONE OF THE TWO, would you save the:

 

- 6 month old toddler,  or the

 

- 10 year old baby?

 

I don't know because neither is less significant than the other on the basis of what you have told me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty funny reading the posts of men who feel they should have the right to interfere with a woman, her family, her health issues, her doctor, and her clergy, for no reason AT ALL except to deny all bodily autonomy rights to that fetus the instant it is born .... if it is female.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Scout said:

We should not force pregnancy  on women...

Nobody is forcing pregnancy on anybody.  If a woman has consensual unprotected sex, she knowingly or unknowingly assumed the responsibilities that came with her decisions.  We live in a world with adults who should understand this.  All actions have consequences

 

4 minutes ago, Scout said:

...that may cause them health problems in the future

Again with the marginal arguments.  Abortions that are health related make up less than 1% of performed abortions.  And this itself is an ambiguous argument.  When is the future?  Are you suggesting that the mother may not know of completely unrelated health risks that may come up months ahead in pregnancy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jrobin15283 said:

Nobody is forcing pregnancy on anybody.  If a woman has consensual unprotected sex, she knowingly or unknowingly assumed the responsibilities that came with her decisions.  We live in a world with adults who should understand this.  All actions have consequences

 

Again with the marginal arguments.  Abortions that are health related make up less than 1% of performed abortions.  And this itself is an ambiguous argument.  When is the future?  Are you suggesting that the mother may not know of completely unrelated health risks that may come up months ahead in pregnancy.

That is between a woman and her doctor.  Not your business, eh?   Given 85-90% of abortions are first trimester, that leaves a lot of health related abortions in the remaining 10-15%.  But there are a lot of health problems that women live with for the rest of their lives that resulted from pregnancy.  Bladders are FREQUENTLY weakened, for example.   Any woman with diabetes should abort for health purposes....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TruroBeth said:

Pretty funny reading the posts of men who feel they should have the right to interfere with a woman

Pretty funny to read the posts of an insane psychopath that does not mind when a human life is taken.  Actually, funny is not a word to describe this.  I would prefer a word like pathetic.

 

4 minutes ago, TruroBeth said:

her family

What does family have to do with this?

 

4 minutes ago, TruroBeth said:

her health issues

There are almost NO life threatening health risks due to pregnancy.

 

5 minutes ago, TruroBeth said:

her doctor

more stupidity...

 

5 minutes ago, TruroBeth said:

and her clergy

again...more stupidity...

 

6 minutes ago, TruroBeth said:

for no reason AT ALL except to deny all bodily autonomy rights to that fetus the instant it is born .... if it is female.

Did you enjoy getting dropped on your head by your mother when you were a baby?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Scout said:

That is between a woman and her doctor.  Not your business, eh?   Given 85-90% of abortions are first trimester, that leaves a lot of health related abortions in the remaining 10-15%.  But there are a lot of health problems that women live with for the rest of their lives that resulted from pregnancy.  Bladders are FREQUENTLY weakened, for example.   Any woman with diabetes should abort for health purposes....

By health related, I meant life-threatening.  I misspoke.  

 

But in all cases when the mother has her life threatened due to pregnancy, she should have an abortion.  But this is not the case most of the time.  So stop using that argument to justify the slaughter of innocent babies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, jrobin15283 said:

Nobody is forcing pregnancy on anybody.  If a woman has consensual unprotected sex, she knowingly or unknowingly assumed the responsibilities that came with her decisions.  We live in a world with adults who should understand this.  All actions have consequences

THat's what getting an abortion is, son - her dealing with the consequences, on her terms - not yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...