Let's talk abortion

If it were human life it wouldn't matter under conservative doctrine anyway because they're trespassing. Therefore, the mother has a right to kill them, regardless.
 
KingRaw! said:
I repeat Good Luck's quotes.


"In the first place, as I have carefully explained, I did NOT compare abortion to the holocaust or slavery."


"And damned right I compare pro-abortion to pro-slavery."


You have no credibility and no one but the far-right takes you seriously.
Click to expand...
The second quote was in a "debate" (as if discussing things with you can be called "debate") where in I explained the parallel as focussed on dehumanization twice (at least). Then when you continued to cry like a little baby about being "called Hitler", I got angry and decided to play along with your mindless self deprecation. And even then (since you truncated the post) I said the comparison was with the way all of them dehumanize their target group.

Too bad for you that your reading comprehension is so lacking. Your childish whining is beyond contempt. But maybe a little pity is due.

And of course, when you take statements and blow them out of proportion, deliberately misstate them, and post them elsewhere (specifically sites where pro-abortionists are in the far majority) you are going to get other pro-abortionists to agree that I am the big bad boogie man for stating such AWFUL, DREADFUL, UNKIND things about people who support the killing of unborn children.

So, care to dispute the fact that abortion rights advocates use dehumanization techniques to justify killing children? Or you gonna run to your other sites crying like my grand daughter?
 
Last edited:
KingRaw! said:
Killing life isn't wrong in human morality. If it were then killing animals, plants and bacteria would. Murder is wrong. Murder = killing human life. And technically a fetus is not human life in the eyes of our law.
Click to expand...
Yes, we all know how well the law can ignore established, proven fact when it wants to. Look how long the law called blacks non-persons.


KingRaw! said:
Abortion reduces our population crisis, poverty and strengthens the economy.
Click to expand...
Wow, you are getting really desperate defending killing children. Shall we open up other kinds of homicide (other than self defense) as legal practice since it is so beneficial to society?

KingRaw! said:
Screw you guys, I'm goin home!
Click to expand...
Bye bye. Sleep tight. Want a lullabye?
 
Last edited:
KingRaw! said:
DIXIE: yeah, you said i am such a bad debater, but i didn't realize we were having a debate. i thought you just wanted to spew some of your typical immoral beliefs on us and take pot shots at people you disagree with. if you want a 'debate' on abortion, i can give you one, but we first have to lay down some ground rules. scientific evidence has to be presented to support your viewpoints, nothing is predicated on your particular feelings or beliefs. likewise, religious beliefs have no bearing on the issue, just basic human morality and ethics. do we agree on these basic rules of debate?


Woah, hold on a second. No religious beliefs are allowed but human morals and ethics pass? Lucky for you I'm an athiest. So I have to provide links and scientific evidence? ok what's science got to do in whether abortion is legal or not? The development stages like no brain in the first 12 weeks or technically a fetus is human life? Whoopty do! We know fetuses are life. We know plants are life. We know bugs are life. What the hell does that argument make?
Click to expand...

Yes, human morals and ethics, I thought these attributes were apparent in humans regardless of religious belief, isn't that what Atheists tell us when they demand they been seen as moral people?

Science has nothing to do with whether abortion is legal, and that is not the topic of the debate, I readily admit abortion is legal, it was upheld by the Supreme Court in a landmark case, Roe v. Wade, so there is no debate over the legality of abortion. The argument is over the human ethics and morality of abortion, and whether it is right or wrong.

Fetuses are human life, that is the big deal here. If fetuses were plant life or bug life, we wouldn't be debating abortion. It is because it is human life, that we debate the subject of whether it is ethical and moral as humans to permit the termination of it. This is because human morality generally has regard for human life, if nothing else. It is a basic and natural human moral attribute.

And this life is not human life in the way a fingernail or tumor is human life, it is a living human organism, a human being. It is not a "clump of cells" and it is not a living "something else" it is a living human being. Granted, it is inside of another living human being, but it is still what it is. After point of conception, nothing is added to make it into a human being, all that is needed for it to reach maturity is time. We can argue about when it is "aware" of things, but I suspect a 3-month-old infant would have no "awareness" of you putting it in a blender. This ability to "be aware" doesn't make us humans, biology does.

Three questions you need to answer for me:

1. If it is not human, what form of living organism is it?
2. If it is not alive, why would it need to be terminated?
3. If it is a living human organism, why are we debating killing it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top