Zone1 Religious or not, Abortion is wrong because life starts at conception

[ding]

Abortion is not prinarily a mater of science, but actually one of individual rights. The questions to be answered are when do roghts begin and why? The disagreement is not over if a ZEF has human DNA or if it is alive.

You are using science to coat your shitty faith based reasons in a more (shallowly) logical dress. It is not working.

It is interesting how your base goes omegalol at science when the topic is creationism or vaccines, to all of a sudden take advantage of it in the abortion debate.

When you don't recognize life in the womb as a genetically distinct human being there is no rights argument, which is probably why you vehemently oppose recognizing life in the womb as a human being in its early stages of its human life cycle which begins at conception and ends at death.

I'm using science to keep zealots from dehumanizing human life in the womb. This is a human rights issue. It is not a religious issue no matter how hard you try to make it one.

 

[ding]

Even though it is murder?

Has abortion ever been prosecuted as murder?

 

[Trickster]

OK. Let's walk through your argument. AGAIN.

• Human life begins at conception.
• Embryos have right to life.
• Killing an embryo is.... Oh, not murder, but a "misdeamnor"... So, it does not have rights then.

You cannot keep your premises straight and are contradicting yourself.

 

[task0778]

Abortion, like capital punishment, goes to a reverence for life that isn't necessarily a religious question. Atheists for example oppose abortion and CP for that reverence. Too many people do not have that reverence, and it shows in our murder rates and suicides. Sadly, I doubt that will change anytime soon.

Democrats seem to solidly support welfare for kids after birth but not before. Repubs OTOH support life before birth but not so much after. I find both parties somewhat hypocritical in that regard.

 

[alang1216]

What I would say is that in the best of circumstances it would be the lessor of two evils.

I'm not sure what the 'best of circumstances' means, but I think we agree. We may only differ on the judging of the two evils.

 

[ding]

I'm not sure what the 'best of circumstances' means, but I think we agree. We may only differ on the judging of the two evils.

The Nazi's didn't go from not killing Jews to killing Jews at the snap of a finger. It was a gradual process. One that can only occur through incremental rationalizations. Better to call an evil evil than to call it good. That's how evil grows.

 

[ding]

OK. Let's walk through your argument. AGAIN.

• Human life begins at conception.
• Embryos have right to life.
• Killing an embryo is.... Oh, not murder, but a "misdeamnor"... So, it does not have rights then.

You cannot keep your premises straight and are contradicting yourself.

Given that my position is that due to the complexity of the issue I would make abortion a Class "C" misdemeanor with no jail time, it seems your characterization leaves something to be desired. You are behaving like a zealot rather than a rational adult.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

woman have a leal right by law to controle their own decisions in regards to reproduction - just what makes 6 weeks any different than 9 months is an obvious flaw in legal jurisprudence as more an issue than anything else.

.



Women have a real right by law to control their owns decisions in regards to the choice to not make an unwanted baby.

Why left cultists cannot figure this out is beyond comprehension.




.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Check out these two answers. They are similar but one adds a bit to the reason when life begins. Thus, it's murder to kill the innocent life of an unborn child no matter at what stage. It's not religious to say conception is our beginning point of Human life. This also points out why we are free agents unto ourselves to choose good or evil. Our DNA is unique.

.

Ask a leftist woman who actually wants that baby in her womb.

Whole different story.

I knew a leftist woman who wanted to trap her rich boyfriend by getting lax with her birth control and getting pregnant. You bet your ass that that baby was a baby, at least right up to the moment the judge said, "I now pronounce you man and wife".


.

 

[alang1216]

The Nazi's didn't go from not killing Jews to killing Jews at the snap of a finger. It was a gradual process. One that can only occur through incremental rationalizations. Better to call an evil evil than to call it good. That's how evil grows.

Sorry but I don't buy the Slippery Slope argument (but I admire how you bring in Nazis):

This type of argument is sometimes used as a form of fearmongering in which the probable consequences of a given action are exaggerated in an attempt to scare the audience. When the initial step is not demonstrably likely to result in the claimed effects, this is called the slippery slope fallacy.​

 

[ding]

Sorry but I don't buy the Slippery Slope argument (but I admire how you bring in Nazis):

This type of argument is sometimes used as a form of fearmongering in which the probable consequences of a given action are exaggerated in an attempt to scare the audience. When the initial step is not demonstrably likely to result in the claimed effects, this is called the slippery slope fallacy.​

You are being paranoid. The transition to the final solution is a perfect analogy of how evil is done gradually. I wasn't within 100 miles of making a slippery slope argument. But if you'd like me to make that argument, I can do that as well.

 

[alang1216]

You are being paranoid. The transition to the final solution is a perfect analogy of how evil is done gradually. I wasn't within 100 miles of making a slippery slope argument. But if you'd like me to make that argument, I can do that as well.

No need, don't be modest, you nailed that slippery slope.

In ancient Rome, infant exposure, the practice of abandoning newborns with the intent they not survive, was a widely accepted and often morally justified practice, especially for female infants. While not always resulting in death, exposure was a common method of limiting family size and, in some cases, fueled the supply of free labor. A very practical solution in some situations but it, thankfully, went out of favor and didn't lead to other rationalizations.

 

[Cougarbear]

You mean like me?

Narcissist...

 

[Leo123]

woman have a leal right by law to controle their own decisions in regards to reproduction - just what makes 6 weeks any different than 9 months is an obvious flaw in legal jurisprudence as more an issue than anything else.

Women don't control themselves when they have to get abortions for the 'mistake' growing inside them. Perhaps they should have controlled themselves and not let the sperm in in the first place? God know there is plenty of ways to do that, birth control pills, shots, insist on condom wearing before sex, etc. OR maybe, just maybe, Get and make a commitment before doin' the 'boogie woogie.'

 

[Cougarbear]

.

Ask a leftist woman who actually wants that baby in her womb.

Whole different story.

I knew a leftist woman who wanted to trap her rich boyfriend by getting lax with her birth control and getting pregnant. You bet your ass that that baby was a baby, at least right up to the moment the judge said, "I now pronounce you man and wife".


.

We know who is driving the abortion evil in the world. It's the leftist who can't even tell us what a woman is.

 

[Cougarbear]

Women don't control themselves when they have to get abortions for the 'mistake' growing inside them. Perhaps they should have controlled themselves and not let the sperm in in the first place? God know there is plenty of ways to do that, birth control pills, shots, insist on condom wearing before sex, etc. OR maybe, just maybe, Get and make a commitment before doin' the 'boogie woogie.'

Leftist like Breeze won't take responsibilities for their actions. To them, it's always "The Devil made them do it."

 

[Leo123]

No need, don't be modest, you nailed that slippery slope.

In ancient Rome, infant exposure, the practice of abandoning newborns with the intent they not survive, was a widely accepted and often morally justified practice, especially for female infants. While not always resulting in death, exposure was a common method of limiting family size and, in some cases, fueled the supply of free labor. A very practical solution in some situations but it, thankfully, went out of favor and didn't lead to other rationalizations.

Yeah, and that was one contributing factor to the fall of Rome.

 

[alang1216]

Narcissist...

Only if it is not true and that is something neither of us can prove.

 

[alang1216]

Yeah, and that was one contributing factor to the fall of Rome.

Really? I had no idea. Got any evidence to back that up?

 

[Monk-Eye]

" None Needs To Explain Logically Of Course "

* Quite Easily Done *

Please point out the part of the Constitution that states this.

States do not have a power to abrogate us 14th , 9th , 1st or 10th us constitutional amendments .

Us 9th amendment relates that not every rite must be enumerated .

Us 14th amendment enumerates equal protection with a us citizen for all persons within us jurisdiction , and live birth is the only non incidental requirement to become a citizen and live birth is a requirement for equal protection with us citizen .

By title 1 section 8 of us code , a person is defined as any born alive , at any stage of development , which reiterates a live birth requirement for equal protection with a citizen .

Therefore , by us 14th amendment and us 10th amendment , states are prohibited in providing constitutional protections for any thing which has not met a live birth requirement to receive them , whereby states are prohibited from proscribing abortion until live birth .

The roe v wade decision is based entirely on a live birth requirement for equal protection with a us citizen , where an ability to survive an imminent live birth at natural viability was substituted in lieu of a live birth requirement , by which roe court decided that states could proscribe abortion in 3rd trimester .

The scotus justices weighing for affirmative in the dumbfounded decision of dobbs should be formally charged with sedition against us 14th , 9th , 1st and 10th amendments and also charged with malfeasance against title 1 section 8 of us code .

Thread 'Demand Any Nomination For Us Supreme Court Justice Explain Blackmun ' Logically Of Course ' Statement From Roe V Wade'

Sep 21, 2020

" Demand Any Nomination For Us Supreme Court Justice Explain Blackmun ' Logically Of Course ' Statement From Roe V Wade "

* On Behalf Of Pro Choice Republican Constitutionalism *

The next nominee for us supreme court should be asked to explain the following statement from justice blackmun whom wrote the majority opinion on roe v wade , ' Logically, of course, a legitimate state interest in this area need not stand or fall on acceptance of the belief that life begins at conception or at some other point prior to live birth." .


* Deeper Analysis *...

• Monk-Eye
• Replies: 42
• Forum: Law and Justice System