Abortion

[Scott]

AProudLefty is one of those who is completely unable to contribute intelligently to any thread or to add value to the board, so he just trolls and derails.

We clearly disagree here.

Your agreement is not required.

We certainly agree here. We may even resolve to agree to disagree, but before that, let's see what else you have to say on the subject...

You were not present in our conversations.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I have at least skimmed through every single post in this thread to date. In many cases, I do more than that. I also keep a complete thread tree of this thread. Ask me whether any post in this thread has been responded to and there's a very high chance that I'll be able to tell you (there are always some posts that don't quote the post they're responding to, making it difficult to know who precisely they're responding to).

You are not able to find a value-added contribution by @AProudLefty on JPP.

Strongly disagree with you there.

 

[Scott]

I've seen no evidence that APL (my shorthand for his name) is pretending to do anything.

Spare me how you have once again turned a blind eye to mountainous evidence.

Making unsubstantiated assertions does your credibility no favours.

 

[Scott]

Setting aside your characterization of APL's post quality, it does seem like he actually believes you, ItN and gfm are all the same person.

Nope.

I suspect we may have to agree to disagree on this point.

It wasn't even his idea.

That'd actually give his belief a little evidence to stand on, in that at least one other person believes/claims to believe the same thing.

He just jumped on the bandwagon as a pivot, as a way of EVADING topics,

Unsubstantiated assertion.

 

[Scott]

I do believe that you and ItN do sometimes have fairly similar posting styles, though not always.

When it comes to science, math and logic, the correct answer will always be the same, regardless of who is providing you that correct answer.

Sure, but I think we could also agree that when it comes to people with the same bias, they will tend to make the same mistakes as well.

Leftists deal almost exclusively in incorrect answers, faulty logic and EVASION. Ergo, they stand poised to shout SOCK! whenever someone exposes their fallacies and supremacies using impenetrable logic.

I'm pretty sure I've had those on the right say I'm a sock in another forum. I have noticed a trend that people tend to accuse someone of being a sock when they are disagreeing with them on some subject.

 

[Scott]

For me, the most distinctive difference between you and ItN is that you generally tend to refrain from what I call "soundbite posts",

Why aren't our disagreements your first clue?

That would be because I've rarely seen you and ItN disagree, and even then, the disagreements have been minor.

AProudLefty claims my denouncement of the IDF as the world's most active terrorist organization, and Into the Night's "Israel is always right" to be indistinguishable.

I haven't seen Lefty do this. @AProudLefty, what say you? I can say that I myself didn't know you had this disagreement with Into the Night.

Into the Night and I disagree on a handful of topics that we have debated here on JPP, and AProudLefty knows this.

I would want to hear what Lefty has to say on this, and that would probably require you mentioning any other topics that would fit the bill.

 

[gfm7175]

How adorable. @IBDaMann and @gfm7175 correcting each other.

Yup. I made a grammar error and he corrected it. So?

 

[gfm7175]

Leftists? Human beings or tumors?

Human beings who need to be prescribed Abrain for their TDS.

 

[IBDaMann]

"we're all to blame", the most famous excuse of career criminals.

... and high plains drifters.

 

[IBDaMann]

Strongly disagree with you there.

You don't get to disagree without providing an example.

 

[IBDaMann]

Making unsubstantiated assertions does your credibility no favours.

Great random statement. Did you read that on a fortune cookie?

 

[IBDaMann]

I suspect we may have to agree to disagree on this point.

Nope.

That'd actually give his belief a little evidence to stand on,

Nope. I have already explained this to you multiple times. You are simply deciding to be difficult, as usual.

 

[IBDaMann]

That would be because I've rarely seen you and ItN disagree, and even then, the disagreements have been minor.

First you claim to have been tracking my conversations then you claim to have no knowledge of my conversations.

I haven't seen Lefty do this.

You haven't ever seen @AProudLefty contribute to JPP in any value-added way, which is why you can't provide a single example.

I can say that I myself didn't know you had this disagreement with Into the Night.

That's when you take my word for it.

I would want to hear what Lefty has to say on this,

Just look it up in a dictionary.

 

[gfm7175]

If I specify that a living human is any stage of human development between sperms and eggs and elderly citizens, do you think that no one can understand my definition?

I understand your definition, but your definition is in error. I've already explained why in a prior response to you. Short answer: sperms and eggs are not stages of human development.

We can all define words related to our discussion on abortion however we like,

Indeed we can. We can also rationally evaluate each other's definitions, refine them, agree/disagree with them, etc etc.

For instance, your definition is in error because it erroneously claims that "sperms and eggs" are a stage of human development. I've already provided, in a prior response to you, the rationale behind why your definition is in error. You need to fix your error before I'd be willing to hold any further discussion on this topic that is based upon your definition of 'living human'.

Another issue with your definition is the fact that any particular stage of human development in and of itself isn't distinguishing between life and death in any way. For instance, an adolescent human could be either living or dead. Meanwhile, the "has a heartbeat" stipulation undeniably rules out the 'dead' option, leaving only the living option.

On the other hand, I've found IBDaMann's definition of 'living human' to be both rational and pragmatic (even if it does annoyingly exclude the "three week window" of time between conception and the development of a heart).

but if we can't agree on the definitions, I doubt we'll ever reach agreement on abortion itself.

This is where you either fix the errors within your definition or rationally explain how IBDaMann's definition is in error.

 

[Scott]

AProudLefty claims my denouncement of the IDF as the world's most active terrorist organization, and Into the Night's "Israel is always right" to be indistinguishable.

Where did you see this? Your imagination?

I suspected that IBDaMann had been mistaken on this point, your response here definitely lends weight to my suspicion.

 

[Scott]

Into the Night and I disagree on a handful of topics that we have debated here on JPP, and AProudLefty knows this.

Multiple personalities can disagree with each other.

You might not have MPD, but you certainly use the same language!

I think you are acknowledging that IBDaMann and Into the Night may not be the same person. If so, I commend you for admitting this .

 

[gfm7175]

I'm not so sure. I think the prime issue should be 2 things- bodily independence and relative intelligence.

Both of which are completely irrelevant to what constitutes a living human, even under your own attempted (but erroneous) definition.

I don't believe that females [mothers] should be forced to be fertilized egg growers [accept the consequences of losing at gambling].

FTFY.

 

[Scott]

what is defined by dictionary and medical text supersedes all.

Dictionaries are inanimate objects; they (in and of themselves) don't define anything. In fact, their purpose isn't for defining words but is rather for standardizing the spelling and pronunciation of words.

From what I've read, their purpose is not to define words, but to let people know how words have been defined. The same goes for spelling. I've seen dictionaries including not just different definitions for the same word, but different spellings as well. I've documented the processes that they follow to do this in previous posts, so I'll ust post a link to Merriam Webster's page on how they choose their words this time around:

How does a word get into a Merriam-Webster dictionary?

This is one of the questions Merriam-Webster editors are most often asked. The answer is simple: usage... Find out more >

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[Scott]

Do you believe that women who freeze their embryos and then decide to discard them are "murdering" their children?

Are you asking me a question that is relevant to the topic?

Definitely. In response to this question, Into the Night answered in the affirmative in post #504. So did gfm in post #528. Is that your answer as well?

My guess is that you'll have a difficult time getting IBD to veer away from the relevant subject matter of this thread, even if for a moment.

Judging from IBDaMann's response to my post in his post #624, I suspect he doesn't consider my question to be veering away from the relevant subject matter.

 

[Scott]

My guess is that you'll have a difficult time getting IBD to veer away from the relevant subject matter of this thread, even if for a moment.

ITN and I are generally more willing to allow SOME deviation away from the relevant subject matter, treating it as a "side discussion", but IBD is like a "buck in rut" when it comes to any potential distractions from the task at hand... he's very laser-focused, eye always on the ball.

I see that your comment's gotten IBDaMann to change his avatar, must admit I find it rather funny .

 

[gfm7175]

That would be because I've rarely seen you and ItN disagree, and even then, the disagreements have been minor.

If you'd look at their discussions about the whole Israel/Palestine thing, then you'd see that they both hold very different views on that subject. You'll also notice that I've been rather quiet on that subject in comparison to the both of them. That alone should be solid evidence that we are all different people.

I haven't seen Lefty do this. @AProudLefty, what say you?

He will say something along the lines of: "But... but... but I have not said THE SPECIFIC WORDS ______________". IOW, he rejects deductive reasoning when convenient in the same manner that you reject set theory when convenient.

I can say that I myself didn't know you had this disagreement with Into the Night.

That's fair. Nobody sees every single post that occurs on this forum. However, if you take a gander into pretty much any Israel/Palestine related thread, you will probably find several back and forth posts between IBD and ITN in which they are in strong disagreement with each other.

You can also dig up some accounting-related posts between IBD and myself in which we both clearly disagree about some particulars (even though we are in agreement on most aspects).

You can also dig up some posts on the subject of Christianity. IBD is a self-proclaimed atheist (not to be confused with the religious belief that God does NOT exist) while ITN and I are both self-proclaimed Christians. ITN and I do attend churches of differing denominations (there's MANY different ones out there, and some churches are even non-denominational) but as Christians we both share the same core belief that Jesus Christ exists and is precisely who he says he is.

ITN is from Washington, I'm from Wisconsin, and IBD is from Maryland (I think?).

One could go on, but I would think that this is a good bit of evidence that we are different people.