There was no confusion. I established the point, because God is from where human rights come. All human life gets the same rights and because of that, there is no right to strip the most innocent of human life, of it's life.
It's common knowledge and hardly a point worthy of debate. Rest assured that they do breath in the womb and they're breathing amniotic fluid, it's an essential process of lung development.
The term common knowledge is a euphemism for absolute bullshit.
Fact is god gave us nothing.
That's not a fact, it's a delusion, which is quite literally, the opposite of a fact.
the delusion is all yours, a major indicator of delusion is proclaiming it's fact.
The assertion that something is "common knowledge" is sometimes associated with the fallacy
argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"). The fallacy essentially warns against assuming that just because everyone believes something is true, it is true.
Misinformation is easily introduced into
rumours by intermediate messengers
False... the term common knowledge is a term which is used to convey that the issue, or fact, is known to be widely known. You were provided a link to an interview with a medical professional who explained it in simple, laymen's terms.
What's more the term common knowledge is not an appeal to popularity... as it does not seek to be accepted on the basis of the commonality... but to merely point to the simple nature of the truth at issue.
However you're argument, ignorantly claiming otherwise, IS a classic example of 'argumentum ad ignorantum' (The Appeal to Ignorance).
For the 3rd time in this thread:
For the beyond the intellectually less fortunate, more discussion on pre-natal breathing...
Again... it's not even a debatable point: Breathing in the womb is a critical element of viable lung development.
