Zone1 Abortion Debate: Come Clean and without fallacy

[Mr. Friscus]

They absolutely are.

Otherwise they wouldn't be on a ventilator.

If you disconnect them from the thing that is keeping them alive and they die, how are they “viable”? LOL.

They aren’t. They are just like a fetus depending on its mother to maintain its life for a time.

 

[Hafar1014]

Indeed. I've busted many on here with the same point.

"It's between the woman and her doctor" to decide if a fetus is allowed to live, "and it's none of your business".

That sounds like the reasoning a mob boss would make. "Whether we kill this snitch is up to us to decide, and it's none of your business, nor the police's business. It's between two adults standing right here".

Only within reasonable limits not on demand for any reason

 

[pknopp]

If you disconnect them from the thing that is keeping them alive and they die, how are they “viable”? LOL.

They aren’t. They are just like a fetus depending on its mother to maintain its life for a time.

You have your words confused. A man on a respirator in a coma can still be viable. A fetus at 2 months is not.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

You have your words confused. A man on a respirator in a coma can still be viable.

A fetus at 2 months is not.

You probably don't even hear yourself proving my point.

A man on a respirator in a coma CAN STILL be viable if you allow for them to recover. Yes. So use the same language: A fetus at 2 months CAN STILL be viable if you leave it alone and let it grow. That's also correct.

You don't get to switch the language.

Otherwise, it would be what both are at the exact moment. The man who cannot breathe without a respirator is not viable, nor is a 2 month fetus.

So which is it. Do we keep them both or are you allowed to kill them both without any problems?

Ouch.. I know you'll refuse to answer, but you just got pinned down hard boy.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

pknopp Yep, just I said you would. You can cowardly hit that "disagree" button all you want, but you can't answer for your twisted logic. The "disagree" is just letting me know you're too proud to admit defeat, you have to offer some childish act of defiance. If you weren't defeated, you'd reply.. but you aren't doing that, and we all know why.

 

[pknopp]

pknopp Yep, just I said you would. You can cowardly hit that "disagree" button all you want, but you can't answer for your twisted logic. The "disagree" is just letting me know you're too proud to admit defeat, you have to offer some childish act of defiance. If you weren't defeated, you'd reply.. but you aren't doing that, and we all know why.

Not worth arguing.

 

[Chuz Life]

You probably don't even hear yourself proving my point.

A man on a respirator in a coma CAN STILL be viable if you allow for them to recover. Yes. So use the same language: A fetus at 2 months CAN STILL be viable if you leave it alone and let it grow. That's also correct.

You don't get to switch the language.

Otherwise, it would be what both are at the exact moment. The man who cannot breathe without a respirator is not viable, nor is a 2 month fetus.

So which is it. Do we keep them both or are you allowed to kill them both without any problems?

Ouch.. I know you'll refuse to answer, but you just got pinned down hard boy.

Consider the point they also try to dodge.

Who was responsible for the child's existence and indeed for their temporary need for "life support?"

Imagine the person responsible for the car accident that leaves a child in their car "being dependent on a ventilator" - demanding a right to remove the ventilator and letting the child die. . . because "the whole ******* thing was an accident" and they don't want to be responsible for the child or the situation THEY created.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Not worth arguing.

Because you can't. It's a simply question right there to answer.

If people have the ability to become viable (like a fetus or someone on a life-saving ventilator), do they have rights?

You can't have one without the other. You want to kill the fetus but don't want to fess up to encouraging a hospital in just yanking the cord because it's a waste of resources. But it's the exact same thing happening. You're at an impasse.. it makes you uncomfortable, you're out of your bubble, so you're pouting and leaving.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Consider the point they also try to dodge.

Who was responsible for the child's existence and indeed for their temporary need for "life support?"

Imagine the person responsible for the car accident that leaves a child in their car "being dependent on a ventilator" - demanding a right to remove the ventilator and letting the child die. . . because "the whole ******* thing was an accident" and they don't want to be responsible for the child or the situation THEY created.

Indeed. I mean, it happens so often when the penis just falls into the vagina for 10 minutes accidentally.

 

[Chuz Life]

Fetuses still aren't children
Embryos at the IVF clinic aren't children.
Zygotes heading towards the exit aren't children.

Biological Status of Human Development Stages

Shared via Copilot

copilot.microsoft.com

https://x.com/i/grok/share/578febc0098446cdbcc2afe3f536c3c6

Gemini Ai - Use AI

Biological Status of Zygote

ChatGPT helps you get answers, find inspiration, and be more productive.

chatgpt.com

Your denials have been refuted many times over.

 

[Chuz Life]

Indeed. I mean, it happens so often when the penis just falls into the vagina for 10 minutes accidentally.

10 Minutes?!?

What are they, in a Marathon?

 

[ding]

what it really is is a clump of cells..

Now, you could make a definite argument for a 20 week old fetus being protected. You could even make an argument for 12 weeks.

But conception? Zygotes? Frozen Embryos? Come on, man.

Not according to science. Why do you hate science so much?

 

[Chuz Life]

Not according to science. Why do you hate science so much?

My guess is that those who have either had abortions themselves or been part of one or more abortions in any kind of supportive way. . . they are likely never to acknowledge that they ever played a part in the intentional killing of a child.

 

[ding]

My guess is that those who have either had abortions themselves or been part of one or more abortions in any kind of supportive way. . . they are likely never to acknowledge that they ever played a part in the intentional killing of a child.

They can't stomach the truth.

 

[Chuz Life]

They can't stomach the truth.

I know a few women who became anti-abortion AFTER they had an abortion themself.

They are (were) wrecked by the realization but they also are some of the hardest fighting pro-lifers you will ever meet. They don't accept the denials because they know from their own experience that an abortion kills a child.

 

[JoeB131]

If you disconnect them from the thing that is keeping them alive and they die, how are they “viable”? LOL.

They aren’t. They are just like a fetus depending on its mother to maintain its life for a time.

Except a ventilator doesn't have a say on whether or not it can shut off life support

A woman does.

 

[JoeB131]

Not according to science. Why do you hate science so much?

Except we mold the science like putty in our hands now.

In 100 years, all babies will probably be gene edited in a lab.

My guess is that those who have either had abortions themselves or been part of one or more abortions in any kind of supportive way. . . they are likely never to acknowledge that they ever played a part in the intentional killing of a child.

Never had an abortion. Never facilitated one, and for the first half of my life, was anti-Abortion.

Then I realized abortion was a bullshit issue used by the rich to get stupid people to vote against your own economic interests.

 

[Chuz Life]

Never had an abortion. Never facilitated one, and for the first half of my life, was anti-Abortion.

Yet you ignorantly deny that an abortion kills a child, even after you have been shown the proof time and again.

Then I realized abortion was a bullshit issue used by the rich to get stupid people to vote against your own economic interests.

You might find this strange but some of us build our conclusions and beliefs around verifiable facts, rather than according to what other people "do, did or might do."

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Except a ventilator doesn't have a say on whether or not it can shut off life support

A woman does.

Are both examples of human life expendable and able to be knowingly killed or not.

You have to take both or leave both.

 

[JoeB131]

Yet you ignorantly deny that an abortion kills a child, even after you have been shown the proof time and again.

You haven't offered any "proof", other than your wishful thinking.

A child isn't a child until a birth certificate is issued. The state does not issue death certificates for abortions or miscarriages before 20 weeks. Fetuses aren't counted on the Census and they aren't allowed as tax dependents.

You might find this strange but some of us build our conclusions and beliefs around verifiable facts, rather than according to what other people "do, did or might do."

Uh huh. This is what has made you an easy mark for the last fifty years.

Riddle me this, Batman, how is it that it took 50 years to overturn Roe? Republicans were in the majority on SCOTUS when it was passed (6-3) and Republicans made 11 of the last 16 appointments. Yet it wasn't until Trump appointed absolute mouth-breathers that we got Dobbs.

And here's the thing, I don't even think Roe was a particularly good decision, as it was based on a non-existant right to privacy. But yet this flawed decision was made by Republicans and maintained by Republicans for nearly 50 years.

Except, of course, it isn't working the way you planned. Even the deepest red states are voting to restore abortion rights when they are allowed to vote on the matter.

Are both examples of human life expendable and able to be knowingly killed or not.

You have to take both or leave both.

Oh, I agree, both are cases where an outside means are required to sustain life, which is why ventilators are turned off all the time.

And a woman has a right to turn off her life support system to an unwanted parasite.