beagle9221214-
#6,397 Other posters here have called you out on the same tactics you use, but then right on que you fain ignorance when convenient of course.
NFBW: Suffice it to say you
beagle9 have no idea when you complain that I use “twisted angle's” whatever the fuck a twisted angle might be. What I use is truth and consistency of reasonable and rational thought.
You need to understand that other posters like #ding and
BackAgain are liars. I have to assume it is #ding and
BackAgain you refer to because they go back the longest in my encounters in this thread.
I have never wavered from my conviction:
“I say and approve of abortion only when non-viable human fetuses are being aborted.” . . . . . “I as a civilization loving human being and as a law-abiding US citizen, I ABSOLUTELY support a women’s right to terminate her pregnancy and have it done in a safe medical professional facility or using safe medical pharmaceuticals under supervision of her doctor. One factor in my conclusion is that viability is the moral line that separates the intentional stopping of a fetal heartbeat from being the mother’s prerogative to being homicide. Once past the viability of the fetus with which she shares her body, she loses her prerogative to terminate her pregnancy. It is too late” NFBW221211-
#6,314
NFBW: You can see by the following early excerpts that I have never used “twisted angles” in my writing. Telling the truth is not a twisted angle.
NFBW220727-
#3,949 I apply RPGeorge’s definition “immature -- human organism” as a fair and scientific definition of the developing human in the womb of every pregnant woman to which I argue the immature human organism, when it depends on receiving oxygenated blood from the living breathing fully developed human being that carries it, may be terminated because the would be mother has a right in good conscience to decide what happens to her health, and pursuit of her mental and economic well being as a citizen of the United States of America under the protection of the Constitution. The immature fetus prior to ability of viable separation from its mother has rights secondary and subordinate to its breathing and nourishment source - The pregant woman.
ding-
#3,792 3,911 #121
NFBW
#3,917 My view is abortion is literally ending the development of a living, genetically distinct human organism beholden to the autonomy of the human being who took part in its creation.”
NFBW220729-
#3,601 BackAgain joins the fray . . . . “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
BackAgain-
#3,594 “Wrong. What it guarantees is the right to life”
NFBW220729-
#3,601 It guarantees the right to life to the born. You already acknowledged that fact. it only mentions born.
BackAgain
#2,434 “Yes. It does mention born. But it doesn’t say that the preborn are, on such a flimsy basis, denied the right to life.”
NFBW220729-
#3,601 The Constitution does not say that a living human zygote inside a woman’s body has a right to continue developing if the woman does not want it. Nor does the Constitution say that terminating a living human zygote is homicide. . . . . . So why do you keep making shit up about what the Constitution says?
END2212150310
