Why Can't The So-Called Pro-Life Crowd Be Honest?

[Ravi]

I'm glad Buttemia brought up germ cells because he just shot himself in the head and lost any credibility (not that he had any).

A germ cell has the potential to become an egg or a sperm. An egg or a sperm have the potential to become an embryo. An embryo has the potential to become a fetus. And a fetus has the potential to become a living human being.

If Buttemia and Cesspool were consistent they would have to conclude that germ cells are living human beings.

And that is just ridiculous.

No, what is ridiculous is the way you're willing to contort yourself to make an absolutely ridiculous premise workable.

They don't have to conclude anything of the sort, and your post is a logical fallacy of the biggest order.

"4. AFFIRMING THE CONSEQUENT. An invalid form of the conditional argument. In this case, the second premise affirms the consequent of the first premise and the conclusion affirms the antecedent. Example: If he wants to get that job, then he must know Spanish. He knows Spanish, so the job is his."

From the University of Phoenix Master List of Logical Fallacies.

I bet you're flunking your logic class. Big time.

 

[JBeukema]

Well the FACTS remain that there is no definitive scientific proof when life begins

When a living human organism comes into being, a human life has come into existence

and "abortion" isn't even mentioned in the Bible.

That's debatable, but irrelevent

So all we have left are the self absorbed who believe in government control and forcing others to conform to THEIR morals.

You have to be religious to want it to be illegal to rape and murder you?

 

[Ravi]

And a fetus has the potential to become a living human being.

The foetus isn't alive?

So women carry a dead baby around for nine months and then it magically comes to life when her water breaks?

That raises serious questions about all those sonograms I see them moving around in...

It's fetus, not foetus. It is alive in the same sense that your germ cell and embryo are but it is not determined when it becomes a living human being.

You lose and forevermore will be regarded as an idiot that claimed two germ cells merge into an embryo.

 

[Immanuel]

That's nice, Immie. But wrong. Abortion numbers would go down if abortion was illegal. Most people are law abiding citizens. However, they will take advantage of laws that make life more convenient for them, even if they don't approve of the general premise.

Many, many women who will get abortions when they're legal will NOT get them when they're illegal. It's that simple.

I'm law abiding... but I have a lead foot. I even have a couple of speeding tickets to my name to prove that.

I know a lot of people that would never park in a handicapped parking space but will smoke pot in the privacy of their own homes.

I know you and I disagree on this and unfortunately, I don't think either one of us will ever be able to prove our beliefs with actual real life events. I think your belief that abortion numbers sky-rocketed with the legalization of abortion is incorrect as is your belief that making it illegal would reverse that trend. There were most likely just as many abortions the year before legalization as there were the year after, it is simply that it was legal to admit to an abortion after whereas before it would have gotten both the woman and, if she had someone else help her, that other person in trouble.

Because abortion is seen to be socially acceptable in these days and times, even making it illegal will not make it rare.

Immie

 

[R.D.]

Well the FACTS remain that there is no definitive scientific proof when life begins and "abortion" isn't even mentioned in the Bible. So all we have left are the self absorbed who believe in government control and forcing others to conform to THEIR morals.

.

Those who don't follow any faith argue that morals have nothing to do with religion. So trying to pigeon hole abortion as such is feeble.

 

[JBeukema]

And a fetus has the potential to become a living human being.

The foetus isn't alive?

So women carry a dead baby around for nine months and then it magically comes to life when her water breaks?

That raises serious questions about all those sonograms I see them moving around in...

It's fetus, not foetus.

You really want to argue over preferred spellings?

Merriam-Webster recognizes it

Foetus - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

It is alive in the same sense that your germ cell and embryo are but it is not determined when it becomes a living human being.

The embryo is an organism. The germ cells are not organisms- they are cells of the parents' bodies (the parents are organisms).

 

[Anguille]

Many, many women who will get abortions when they're legal will NOT get them when they're illegal. It's that simple.

Pure supposition. Times have changed.

 

[Zoom-boing]

And a fetus has the potential to become a living human being.

The foetus isn't alive?

So women carry a dead baby around for nine months and then it magically comes to life when her water breaks?

That raises serious questions about all those sonograms I see them moving around in...

It's fetus, not foetus. It is alive in the same sense that your germ cell and embryo are but it is not determined when it becomes a living human being.

You lose and forevermore will be regarded as an idiot that claimed two germ cells merge into an embryo.

A fetus is the early stage of development of a human being. It isn't more or less human than a seven month baby in-utero is or a born infant or a five year old; it is simply in a different stage of development. From when it is conceived it is a human being and abortion ends/destroys/kills that human being.

The dancing around that so many of you folks do with the "it's not quite human yet" bullshit in order to justify abortion is nothing short of mindboggling.

 

[Immanuel]

Immie thanks for your respectful replies, and no I wasn't referring to you in the 1st post. I think you're different than others on this thread and that you don't judge me and view me as your moral inferior because of my view on the subject.

I think we've discussed this before, personally I don't want my view of pro-choice shoved on others. I want it to be a state issue, and if the state chooses a pro-life law i'll be fine with it as it'll show the republic at work, it likely will never become an issue in my life or my future children's lives but if it did I would then react accordingly.

What I would like is to see is fewer abortions. I really don't care how that is achieved. I don't believe it can be achieved by overturning Roe. If only it were that simple. I think our attitude on life must change and the only way that can happen is a slow methodical changing of the hearts of human beings.

As long as we view the other side as being the enemy, things are not going to get any better. When we start talking together and brainstorming about our issues is when we can hope to see change: not before then.

Immie

I agree I'd like to see far less abortions. Personally I think sex education and availability of birth control are 2 big ways to decrease it, but often times (maybe not with you) those 2 things are looked down upon by the same pro-life crowd.

I think abstinence education is a joke, when I was 16 and probably most other guys I wanted to hump everything, you can't teach people out of their natural hormones.

I do not think abstinence education is a joke. I think abstinence-only education is a joke. I think abstinence should be taught as the only 100% effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancy. As long as abstinence is practiced there will be no unwanted pregnancy. Unfortunately, reality must be taken into account and our very liberal views on sex and teen-age sex play a part in the effectiveness of abstinence.

I, too was one of those 16 year old boys, but, don't tell anyone, I made it through high school with my virginity... unfortunately... part of that was because my girl friend was part Cherokee Indian with a mom that would literally take her husband apart for any mistake on his part... I was not about to get on my girlfriend's mom's bad side. Also, they owned a wolf that hated teen-aged boys. If I so much as held my girlfriend's hand while "dog" was present, I was taking my life into my own hands.

I am not opposed to sex education or birth control. I am opposed to schools giving out condoms. In my opinion, it is not the place of the school districts to promote teen-aged sex.

Immie

 

[kaz]

Well the FACTS remain that there is no definitive scientific proof when life begins

When a living human organism comes into being, a human life has come into existence

and "abortion" isn't even mentioned in the Bible.

That's debatable, but irrelevent

So all we have left are the self absorbed who believe in government control and forcing others to conform to THEIR morals.

You have to be religious to want it to be illegal to rape and murder you?

Tell me what laws other then Obamacare, which was ruled Unconstitutional, does government tell someone what they must do? A woman who has committed no crime is told by the government she must carry a baby to term. That is flagrantly not an appropriate role of government. You want her to? Convince here there are options and that it's the right thing to do. If you're too lazy to get off your fat ass and take the responsibility to advocate your morality yourself, don't run to government to use guns to do it for you. It's as simple as that. You are part of the problem with people just failing to take personal responsibility. The allure of force and coping out to politicians to save you the work is just too strong. It may be a minority of us who don't suffer from that personal failing, but there are a lot of us.

 

[Anguille]

That's nice, Immie. But wrong. Abortion numbers would go down if abortion was illegal. Most people are law abiding citizens. However, they will take advantage of laws that make life more convenient for them, even if they don't approve of the general premise.

Many, many women who will get abortions when they're legal will NOT get them when they're illegal. It's that simple.

I'm law abiding... but I have a lead foot. I even have a couple of speeding tickets to my name to prove that.

I know a lot of people that would never park in a handicapped parking space but will smoke pot in the privacy of their own homes.

I know you and I disagree on this and unfortunately, I don't think either one of us will ever be able to prove our beliefs with actual real life events. I think your belief that abortion numbers sky-rocketed with the legalization of abortion is incorrect as is your belief that making it illegal would reverse that trend. There were most likely just as many abortions the year before legalization as there were the year after, it is simply that it was legal to admit to an abortion after whereas before it would have gotten both the woman and, if she had someone else help her, that other person in trouble.

Because abortion is seen to be socially acceptable in these days and times, even making it illegal will not make it rare.

Immie

I agree. Also add the the fact that there is more reporting in the news about children mistreated by adoptive or foster parents and that this probably leads some women who haves qualms about having an abortion to decide the lesser of what they believe to be two evils.

 

[Dr.Drock]

What I would like is to see is fewer abortions. I really don't care how that is achieved. I don't believe it can be achieved by overturning Roe. If only it were that simple. I think our attitude on life must change and the only way that can happen is a slow methodical changing of the hearts of human beings.

As long as we view the other side as being the enemy, things are not going to get any better. When we start talking together and brainstorming about our issues is when we can hope to see change: not before then.

Immie

I agree I'd like to see far less abortions. Personally I think sex education and availability of birth control are 2 big ways to decrease it, but often times (maybe not with you) those 2 things are looked down upon by the same pro-life crowd.

I think abstinence education is a joke, when I was 16 and probably most other guys I wanted to hump everything, you can't teach people out of their natural hormones.

I do not think abstinence education is a joke. I think abstinence-only education is a joke. I think abstinence should be taught as the only 100% effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancy. As long as abstinence is practiced there will be no unwanted pregnancy. Unfortunately, reality must be taken into account and our very liberal views on sex and teen-age sex play a part in the effectiveness of abstinence.

I, too was one of those 16 year old boys, but, don't tell anyone, I made it through high school with my virginity... unfortunately... part of that was because my girl friend was part Cherokee Indian with a mom that would literally take her husband apart for any mistake on his part... I was not about to get on my girlfriend's mom's bad side. Also, they owned a wolf that hated teen-aged boys. If I so much as held my girlfriend's hand while "dog" was present, I was taking my life into my own hands.

I am not opposed to sex education or birth control. I am opposed to schools giving out condoms. In my opinion, it is not the place of the school districts to promote teen-aged sex.

Immie

Good point, I guess I have no issue with it being a part of sex-ed but I don't think people with a lot of opportunities would really take it serious. But if some did and it saved a potential unwanted pregnancy even once it'd be worth it.

Yeah personally I think handing out condoms in public schools is weird too, high school kids know where they can buy condoms I don't think they don't buy them because they don't know where to get them. I think many don't use them because they don't take the potential consequences seriously, like having an unwanted pregnancy or an STD.

Luckily I was and am still scared to death of both of those things.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Well the FACTS remain that there is no definitive scientific proof when life begins

When a living human organism comes into being, a human life has come into existence

That's debatable, but irrelevent

So all we have left are the self absorbed who believe in government control and forcing others to conform to THEIR morals.

You have to be religious to want it to be illegal to rape and murder you?

Tell me what laws other then Obamacare, which was ruled Unconstitutional, does government tell someone what they must do? A woman who has committed no crime is told by the government she must carry a baby to term. That is flagrantly not an appropriate role of government. You want her to? Convince here there are options and that it's the right thing to do. If you're too lazy to get off your fat ass and take the responsibility to advocate your morality yourself, don't run to government to use guns to do it for you. It's as simple as that. You are part of the problem with people just failing to take personal responsibility. The allure of force and coping out to politicians to save you the work is just too strong. It may be a minority of us who don't suffer from that personal failing, but there are a lot of us.

I thought the governments job was to protect its people from harm.

 

[JBeukema]

Tell me what laws other then Obamacare, which was ruled Unconstitutional, does government tell someone what they must do?

United States Code: Title 18,4. Misprision of felony | LII / Legal Information Institute

Vehicle registration

Taxes

Traffic laws

Jaywalking laws (you must cross at the corner or crosswalk)

child neglect and abandonment laws

businesses must file information regarding their affairs...

A woman who has committed no crime is told by the government she must carry a baby to term.

A person is told they may not kill another person

This is very much a matter for the State- or should I not be arrested for shooting you in the face?

Don't want me to? Convince me not to.

 

[Anguille]

The foetus isn't alive?

So women carry a dead baby around for nine months and then it magically comes to life when her water breaks?

That raises serious questions about all those sonograms I see them moving around in...

It's fetus, not foetus. It is alive in the same sense that your germ cell and embryo are but it is not determined when it becomes a living human being.

You lose and forevermore will be regarded as an idiot that claimed two germ cells merge into an embryo.

A fetus is the early stage of development of a human being. It isn't more or less human than a seven month baby in-utero is or a born infant or a five year old; it is simply in a different stage of development. From when it is conceived it is a human being and abortion ends/destroys/kills that human being.

The dancing around that so many of you folks do with the "it's not quite human yet" bullshit in order to justify abortion is nothing short of mindboggling.

Is it any more mind boggling than the fancy footwork of the anti choicers who cannot acknowledge that a pregnant woman is a human being?

Ever notice how those pics some freaks post of fetuses in vitro never show the woman in whose womb the fetus resides? They just show her womb because that is all she is to them. A means to an end.

 

[kaz]

Tell me what laws other then Obamacare, which was ruled Unconstitutional, does government tell someone what they must do?

United States Code: Title 18,4. Misprision of felony | LII / Legal Information Institute

Vehicle registration

Taxes

Traffic laws

Jaywalking laws (you must cross at the corner or crosswalk)

child neglect and abandonment laws

businesses must file information regarding their affairs...

A woman who has committed no crime is told by the government she must carry a baby to term.

A person is told they may not kill another person

This is very much a matter for the State- or should I not be arrested for shooting you in the face?

Don't want me to? Convince me not to.

You didn't grasp the argument

 

[R.D.]

It's fetus, not foetus. It is alive in the same sense that your germ cell and embryo are but it is not determined when it becomes a living human being.

You lose and forevermore will be regarded as an idiot that claimed two germ cells merge into an embryo.

A fetus is the early stage of development of a human being. It isn't more or less human than a seven month baby in-utero is or a born infant or a five year old; it is simply in a different stage of development. From when it is conceived it is a human being and abortion ends/destroys/kills that human being.

The dancing around that so many of you folks do with the "it's not quite human yet" bullshit in order to justify abortion is nothing short of mindboggling.

Is it any more mind boggling than the fancy footwork of the anti choicers who cannot acknowledge that a pregnant woman is a human being?

Ever notice how those pics some freaks post of fetuses in vitro never show the woman in whose womb the fetus resides? They just show her womb because that is all she is to them. A means to an end.

There's an argurment I haven't heard yet.

Yes woman are not human

 

[AllieBaba]

Many, many women who will get abortions when they're legal will NOT get them when they're illegal. It's that simple.

Pure supposition. Times have changed.

Women are more likely to break the law now?

What horse crap.

There's not much to argue abut when one side refuses to accept reality.

This imaginary vast number of abortions performed illegally in the past is just that...IMAGINARY. The few stats that we DO have now far exceed the numbers of abortions performed in the past. How do we know that? We know that because of the fact that the only way the pro-abortionists get any numbers at ALL for that fact is when they include ALL miscarriages, ALL fetal and maternal deaths, in the numbers they lump together for pre-Roe v Wade "abortions".

We know this because there are more women now, and because of those women, more are sexually active.

This pretense that a million illegal abortions took place each year before Roe v. Wade is complete smoke and mirrors. It's dishonest. There's absolutely no evidence that it's true.

There is, however, evidence that abortions have climbed steadily....not just since R v W was first passed (since you want to quibble over the reliability of the numbers prior to that) but for every year subsequent to that. The numbers kept climbing, and climbing and climbing. They hiccupped in the 90s, then declined around 2005 I think...and now they're holding steady.

The fact that they climbed steadily AFTER we started getting some numbers is as much proof as anyone is ever going to get, and it clearly indicates that the more abortions is pushed, the more clinics that are open, the more people get abortions. The slight decreases happen at the same time that funding was reduced and clinics closed. Go figure. So...if they aren't available women won't, by and large, get them.

Or are you going to honestly insist that the numbers don't really decrease, women just use coathangers instead?

 

[Zoom-boing]

It's fetus, not foetus. It is alive in the same sense that your germ cell and embryo are but it is not determined when it becomes a living human being.

You lose and forevermore will be regarded as an idiot that claimed two germ cells merge into an embryo.

A fetus is the early stage of development of a human being. It isn't more or less human than a seven month baby in-utero is or a born infant or a five year old; it is simply in a different stage of development. From when it is conceived it is a human being and abortion ends/destroys/kills that human being.

The dancing around that so many of you folks do with the "it's not quite human yet" bullshit in order to justify abortion is nothing short of mindboggling.

Is it any more mind boggling than the fancy footwork of the anti choicers who cannot acknowledge that a pregnant woman is a human being?

Ever notice how those pics some freaks post of fetuses in vitro never show the woman in whose womb the fetus resides? They just show her womb because that is all she is to them. A means to an end.

Huh? Whoever said she wasn't human? If a fetus is a human being then surely the woman who is carrying that fetus is a human being.

They don't show the pictures of the woman because she has remained intact. All of her. Every little bit of her. Her head, arms, legs, toenails, spleen. Even her womb! Yup, all there. The aborted? Not so much. That's kind of the point of the pic.

 

[Anguille]

Many, many women who will get abortions when they're legal will NOT get them when they're illegal. It's that simple.

Pure supposition. Times have changed.

Women are more likely to break the law now?

What horse crap.

There's not much to argue abut when one side refuses to accept reality.

This imaginary vast number of abortions performed illegally in the past is just that...IMAGINARY. The few stats that we DO have now far exceed the numbers of abortions performed in the past. How do we know that? We know that because of the fact that the only way the pro-abortionists get any numbers at ALL for that fact is when they include ALL miscarriages, ALL fetal and maternal deaths, in the numbers they lump together for pre-Roe v Wade "abortions".

We know this because there are more women now, and because of those women, more are sexually active.

This pretense that a million illegal abortions took place each year before Roe v. Wade is complete smoke and mirrors. It's dishonest. There's absolutely no evidence that it's true.

There is, however, evidence that abortions have climbed steadily....not just since R v W was first passed (since you want to quibble over the reliability of the numbers prior to that) but for every year subsequent to that. The numbers kept climbing, and climbing and climbing. They hiccupped in the 90s, then declined around 2005 I think...and now they're holding steady.

The fact that they climbed steadily AFTER we started getting some numbers is as much proof as anyone is ever going to get, and it clearly indicates that the more abortions is pushed, the more clinics that are open, the more people get abortions. The slight decreases happen at the same time that funding was reduced and clinics closed. Go figure. So...if they aren't available women won't, by and large, get them.

Or are you going to honestly insist that the numbers don't really decrease, women just use coathangers instead?

Your guess is as good as mine, Allie.

I only say that to be diplomatic. My guess is more accurate.