Jump to content

Abortion Controversy

Abortion  

80 members have voted

  1. 1. Abortion

    • Pro-Life
      13
    • Pro-Choice
      48
    • I don't care
      11
    • Other (explain)
      8


Recommended Posts

:wtf:

 

(No, there's no such thing as a "pro-abortionist", nor do those that identify as 'pro-choice' advocate for the killing of children.)

Indeed they do, since that is what abortion is.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post

Abortion doesn't kill children. If you suggest that fetuses, embryos or even single-celled fertilized eggs are "children", then perhaps you could say that pro-choice "kills children" but then you are a corpse (you will be, someday) and the English language is dead because any word can mean anything. Tablet brick potato llama.

 

But, back to IVF, embryos ("living children"?!?!?!?!) are killed by the literal cartload and I hear no qualms about that...so I'm curious why they can't be used for stem cell research.

Share this post


Link to post
Abortion doesn't kill children.

What is your definition of "child"?

 

If you suggest that fetuses, embryos or even single-celled fertilized eggs are "children", then perhaps you could say that pro-choice "kills children" but then you are a corpse (you will be, someday) and the English language is dead because any word can mean anything. Tablet brick potato llama.

Equating the beginning with the end is not logical.

 

But, back to IVF, embryos ("living children"?!?!?!?!) are killed by the literal cartload and I hear no qualms about that...so I'm curious why they can't be used for stem cell research.

Never said they couldn't, just said they aren't.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Abortion doesn't kill children.

What is your definition of "child"?

 

From birth to teenage.

 

If you suggest that fetuses, embryos or even single-celled fertilized eggs are "children", then perhaps you could say that pro-choice "kills children" but then you are a corpse (you will be, someday) and the English language is dead because any word can mean anything. Tablet brick potato llama.

Equating the beginning with the end is not logical.

 

Completely agree.

 

But, back to IVF, embryos ("living children"?!?!?!?!) are killed by the literal cartload and I hear no qualms about that...so I'm curious why they can't be used for stem cell research.

Never said they couldn't, just said they aren't.

 

But you said that "killing children" should not be done for stem cell research.

Share this post


Link to post
From birth to teenage.

Then your definition is lacking.

 

Definition: A son or daughter of any age.

 

Completely agree.

Then why did you?

 

But you said that "killing children" should not be done for stem cell research.

Have they implanted into a uterus? Once they have, then it is murder, not before.

 

Since nobody here shares my penchant for Catholic ideals, I am not using the "from conception" argument.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
From birth to teenage.

Then your definition is lacking.

 

Definition: A son or daughter of any age.

 

Fine. A son or daughter from birth.

 

Completely agree.

Then why did you?

 

If an embryo is a baby, then you are a corpse.

 

But you said that "killing children" should not be done for stem cell research.

Have they implanted into a uterus? Once they have, then it is murder, not before.

 

Yet, many are against it even when it has never implanted....and consider it abortion or "killing children" (using your very same argument).

Share this post


Link to post
Fine. A son or daughter from birth.

Doesn't say anything about birth in the definition...

 

If an embryo is a baby, then you are a corpse.

Not true. Bad analogies don't help you. Being illogical will help you even less.

 

Yet, many are against it even when it has never implanted....and consider it abortion or "killing children" (using your very same argument).

And I just said that I was NOT using that argument specifically to avoid this sort of argument arising.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Fine. A son or daughter from birth.

Doesn't say anything about birth in the definition...

 

You asked me my definition.

 

If an embryo is a baby, then you are a corpse.

Not true. Bad analogies don't help you. Being illogical will help you even less.

 

This is YOUR logic, not mine. An embryo is no more a baby than you are a corpse. Please explain why it's different.

 

Yet, many are against it even when it has never implanted....and consider it abortion or "killing children" (using your very same argument).

And I just said that I was NOT using that argument specifically to avoid this sort of argument arising.

 

Yet, this is precisely the problem. Why is implantation the dividing line?

Share this post


Link to post
You asked me my definition.

And your definition is incorrect.

 

This is YOUR logic, not mine. An embryo is no more a baby than you are a corpse. Please explain why it's different.

Show me anywhere that I equate a living human to a dead human. You won't find it.

 

Yet, this is precisely the problem. Why is implantation the dividing line?

Because implantation means it is more likely than not going to (if not aborted) survive to an age of over 60 years.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
You asked me my definition.

And your definition is incorrect.

 

This is YOUR logic, not mine. An embryo is no more a baby than you are a corpse. Please explain why it's different.

Show me anywhere that I equate a living human to a dead human. You won't find it.

 

You equated an embryo with a "child".

 

Yet, this is precisely the problem. Why is implantation the dividing line?

Because implantation means it is more likely than not going to (if not aborted) survive to an age of over 60 years.

 

And eventually become a corpse. See? This is your logic, not mine.

 

But, if you really don't like this one, then a toddler is an adult and having sex with a toddler is the same as having sex with an adult.

 

Sound good?

Share this post


Link to post
You equated an embryo with a "child".

Not the same thing as equating a living person with a dead body.

 

And eventually become a corpse. See? This is your logic, not mine.

That is your lack of logic... It has nothing to do with me.

 

But, if you really don't like this one, then a toddler is an adult and having sex with a toddler is the same as having sex with an adult.

 

Sound good?

Equating 2 completely different stages of human development is not logical.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Equating 2 completely different stages of human development is not logical.

 

I completely agree.

Yet you're the only one who is doing so.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Not at all. I'm not the one saying that an embryo is a child. YOU ARE.

I'm not the only one saying an implanted embryo is a child, you on the other hand are the only one saying a living human being is really just a dead body.

 

And "living embryo = child" =/= "living human = dead body".

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Not at all. I'm not the one saying that an embryo is a child. YOU ARE.

I'm not the only one saying an implanted embryo is a child, you on the other hand are the only one saying a living human being is really just a dead body.

 

And "living embryo = child" =/= "living human = dead body".

 

If you don't understand the analogy, just say so.

 

You stated that if x leads to y, then x = y. Did you or did you not state this?

Share this post


Link to post
If you don't understand the analogy, just say so.

I do indeed understand it, however it is using broken logic to come to that conclusion.

 

You stated that if x leads to y, then x = y. Did you or did you not state this?

I did not.

 

Y=X

Y=Z

X=/=Z

 

These functions can exist together in real life, but not in basic algebra.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post


×
×
  • Create New...

This website uses cookies, as do most websites since the 90s. By using this site, you consent to cookies. We have to say this or we get in trouble. Learn more.