Zone1 Abortion Debate: Come Clean and without fallacy

[initforme]

Even if that were the words of the SCOTUS in Dobbs (it wasn't) and even if it were the official words of all three branches of the "Government," (it's not). . . it wouldn't be

A declining birthrate will fix it all.

 

[Chuz Life]

A declining birthrate will fix it all.

The subject of the debate is here and now.

Speculations about the future that may or may not be impactful do not change the debate that is taking place in the present.

"Justice delayed is justice denied."

 

[initforme]

The subject of the debate is here and now.

Speculations about the future that may or may not be impactful do not change the debate that is taking place in the present.

"Justice delayed is justice denied."

Ive no dog in the fight. Capitulation feels great.

 

[Chuz Life]

Ive no dog in the fight. Capitulation feels great.

I wonder if your therapist can explain your need to inject yourself into arguments, conversations, or debates where you have no "dog in the fight?"

Maybe they can explain how that jibes with your proud capitulations, too.

 

[initforme]

I wonder if your therapist can explain your need to inject yourself into arguments, conversations, or debates where you have no "dog in the fight?"

Maybe they can explain how that jibes with your proud capitulations, too.

I believe the issue has been adequately dealt with. So to me it matters nothing anymore. Thats my christian perspective.

 

[Chuz Life]

I believe the issue has been adequately dealt with. So to me it matters nothing anymore. Thats my christian perspective.

Ok, and like I said. . . maybe your therapist could explain (as I don't think you can) - where your need to inject yourself into a discussion on an issue where you "have no dog in the fight." Feel it's been "adequately dealt with" etc.

Is it simply that you have some "Christian" need to be noticed?

 

[JoeB131]

Is a human "fetus" a biological organism?

It is.

Does a human fetus not have biological "parents?"

They do.

Your denials will never negate those biological facts.

It's not a viable organism, therefore not a person.

2/3rd of Zygotes never attach to the uterine wall.

2/5th of the pregnancies that do happen end in abortion or miscarriage (3.5 Million live births vs. a million abortions and a million miscarriages.)

Do you want to go on record as saying any one of those or all three of those agencies are infallible?

Do we not all have a right (even a responsibility) to shine a light on where they are "wrong?"

Except they aren't "Wrong", they just recognize the impracticality of claiming a fetus is a person.

So going to the above.. if a fetus is a person, can you claim it as a tax deduction on your taxes? Even if it was aborted or miscarried?

That kidney bean size child is also an "actual child." Your denials not withstanding.

PS. The right to life is not tantamount to the right to free shit from everyone else. It never has been. It simply the right to be "protected" from unjust acts and unjustified killings.

So you are arguing that this is never about taking care of the children, it's just about keeping women from doing what they want.

Scratch a pro-lifer, find a misogynist. Every time.

A fetus’s ability to survive outside the womb isn’t what determines whether it’s biologically alive.

Viability is a medical term about when a fetus could survive independently with current technology, not a definition of life itself. A fetus has its own developing organs, metabolism, and growth from the moment it begins—those are biological markers of life, even if it can’t live independently yet.

The key thing is that it can't live independently. It requires a woman to keep it alive. Which if she is into that sort of thing, decorating a nursery and picking out baby names, that's awesome.

But if she knows she can't take care of it, or maybe it's damaged, or maybe she just has no desire to be a parent, abortions are going to happen no matter how much you stomp your little feet.

If she is only there for a pap smear, she has nothing to worry about from people simply exercising their 1st. Amendment rights.

Are the ICE agents' rights being violated somehow when protestors call THEM murderers?

Why should a woman who is getting an abortion have to 'worry' about crazy people on the streets screaming at her?

Nope, ICE are the ones violating rights..

Can we agree that children's lives and rights are not something we can "barter" with?

No, wouldn't agree to that at all.

Here's the thing. I don't think abortion is a "good" thing, despite supporting a woman's right to it. I'll go one step further and say most women who have abortions have them because of their own carelessness. - Not using contraception properly, not picking men who are good father material, etc.

I just realize the impracticality of outlawing it. You seem to live in a fantasy world that if you just pass a law against abortion, abortions will stop happening because everyone will say, "Gee, that is bad".

In fact, quite the contrary, the number of abortions since Dobbs has INCREASED after decades of decline.

So why are abortions going up?

Well, Trump has slashed money to Planned Parenthood- again. He's slashing welfare programs, again. So not surprisingly, some women are just choosing abortion as the path of least resistance.

 

[Bitterhook]

It's not a viable organism, therefore not a person.

Perhaps we should test your theory, drop you off naked and alone right here, and see if you are a viable organism.
Our would you like me to just decide you aren't and let someone kill you?

 

[ding]

It's not a viable organism, therefore not a person.

DNA says otherwise.

 

[JoeB131]

Perhaps we should test your theory, drop you off naked and alone right here, and see if you are a viable organism.
Our would you like me to just decide you aren't and let someone kill you?

Again, you suck at analogies.

There's no reason I'd be out in the middle of the ocean without proper vehicles or equipment.

DNA says otherwise.

Again, 2/3rd of fertilized Zygotes never attach to the Uterine Wall.

They have unique, human DNA, but they never become "people". Nor do the 40% of pregnancies that end in miscarriage or abortion.

 

[Bitterhook]

Again, you suck at analogies.

There's no reason I'd be out in the middle of the ocean without proper vehicles or equipment.

However, you continue to perform well within what anyone can expect from you, and I am compelled to applaud your consistency.
Should you ever desire to actually have a discussion, feel free to start, and I will allow you a little time to learn how that may work better in regard to anyone ever taking you seriously.

 

[ding]

Again, 2/3rd of fertilized Zygotes never attach to the Uterine Wall.

Again... at conception a new genetically distinct human being has come into existence. This is not conjecture. This is scientific empirical evidence that is undeniable. At every point along the continuum - from conception to death - it posses the appropriate characteristics for that stage of its human life cycle.

 

[ding]

There's no reason I'd be out in the middle of the ocean without proper vehicles or equipment.

The point Bitterhook is making is that your viability argument is arbitrary and capricious. You are jumping through a lot of hoops using pretzel logic to avoid saying the obvious which is that you are good with ending a human life. You don't believe in God. You don't believe in good and evil. You only believe in satisfying material needs and urges. So just say, "to hell with that baby. **** that baby. I'm glad they killed it. I hope it suffered" and be done with it.

 

[Bitterhook]

Again... at conception a new genetically distinct human being has come into existence. This is not conjecture. This is scientific empirical evidence that is undeniable. At every point along the continuum - from conception to death - it posses the appropriate characteristics for that stage of its human life cycle.

Not to mention that trying to survive can be hard enough in a lot of conditions, and the decision to kill someone as a matter of convenience is more of an attempt to defeat the purpose of survival altogether, as well as contrary to natural instinct and part of what makes it deplorable as nothing more than unjustified selfishness.

 

[ding]

Not to mention that trying to survive can be hard enough in a lot of conditions, and the decision to kill someone as a matter of convenience is more of an attempt to defeat the purpose of survival altogether, as well as contrary to natural instinct and part of what makes it deplorable as nothing more than unjustified selfishness.

I couldn't have said that better.

 

[Bitterhook]

You're far too limited to have a discussion with.

You, sir, are a simpleton.

And yet you continue to pronounce your own limits why trying to apply them to others, thus defeating the premise of your comment, and therefore remaining consistent if nothing else.

 

[ding]

It's not a viable organism, therefore not a person.

2/3rd of Zygotes never attach to the uterine wall.

2/5th of the pregnancies that do happen end in abortion or miscarriage (3.5 Million live births vs. a million abortions and a million miscarriages.)






Except they aren't "Wrong", they just recognize the impracticality of claiming a fetus is a person.

So going to the above.. if a fetus is a person, can you claim it as a tax deduction on your taxes? Even if it was aborted or miscarried?



So you are arguing that this is never about taking care of the children, it's just about keeping women from doing what they want.

Scratch a pro-lifer, find a misogynist. Every time.



The key thing is that it can't live independently. It requires a woman to keep it alive. Which if she is into that sort of thing, decorating a nursery and picking out baby names, that's awesome.

But if she knows she can't take care of it, or maybe it's damaged, or maybe she just has no desire to be a parent, abortions are going to happen no matter how much you stomp your little feet.



Why should a woman who is getting an abortion have to 'worry' about crazy people on the streets screaming at her?

Nope, ICE are the ones violating rights..



No, wouldn't agree to that at all.

Here's the thing. I don't think abortion is a "good" thing, despite supporting a woman's right to it. I'll go one step further and say most women who have abortions have them because of their own carelessness. - Not using contraception properly, not picking men who are good father material, etc.

I just realize the impracticality of outlawing it. You seem to live in a fantasy world that if you just pass a law against abortion, abortions will stop happening because everyone will say, "Gee, that is bad".

In fact, quite the contrary, the number of abortions since Dobbs has INCREASED after decades of decline.

So why are abortions going up?

Well, Trump has slashed money to Planned Parenthood- again. He's slashing welfare programs, again. So not surprisingly, some women are just choosing abortion as the path of least resistance.

Don't you find your position on abortion to be hypocritical considering your signature line?

She's Everybody's Sister
She's symbolic of our Failure
She's the One in Fifty Million
Who can help us to be Free
Because she died on TV
(And I grieve for my sister.)

 

[JoeB131]

And yet you continue to pronounce your own limits why trying to apply them to others, thus defeating the premise of your comment, and therefore remaining consistent if nothing else.

Like I said, guy, you are too simplistic and you make dumb analogies.... not really worth my time to even mock you.

The sad thing is, you think you are making good points.

The point @Bitterhook is making is that your viability argument is arbitrary and capricious. You are jumping through a lot of hoops using pretzel logic to avoid saying the obvious which is that you are good with ending a human life. You don't believe in God. You don't believe in good and evil. You only believe in satisfying material needs and urges. So just say, "to hell with that baby. **** that baby. I'm glad they killed it. I hope it suffered" and be done with it.

Well, he sucks at making a point.

The problem is, it's not a "Human life" if it isn't viable outside the body of a willing person. The keyword there is "Willing". To carry a pregnancy to term takes a lot of commitment from a woman. She is going to accept the short-term and long-term effects on her health to bring that baby into the world. So I can't fault any woman for saying, "Thanks, but no thanks".

Now, ideal world, absolutely, it would be better if she never had sex or at least used contraception. We don't live in an ideal world.

So here we are, a bunch of MEN, arguing over what a woman should or should not do.

 

[JoeB131]

Don't you find your position on abortion to be hypocritical considering your signature line?

Not really. They don't show abortions on TV.

The line comes from a Roger Waters song, about a woman who is killed in Tiananmen Square. But I thought it applied equally well to Renee Good.

 

[ding]

Well, he sucks at making a point.

The problem is, it's not a "Human life" if it isn't viable outside the body of a willing person. The keyword there is "Willing". To carry a pregnancy to term takes a lot of commitment from a woman. She is going to accept the short-term and long-term effects on her health to bring that baby into the world. So I can't fault any woman for saying, "Thanks, but no thanks".

Now, ideal world, absolutely, it would be better if she never had sex or at least used contraception. We don't live in an ideal world.

So here we are, a bunch of MEN, arguing over what a woman should or should not do.

You are still jumping through unnecessary hoops. You are trying to make something moral when it's not. Just say, "to hell with that baby. **** that baby. I'm glad they killed it. I hope it suffered" and be done with it.