Observation: Overpopulation Is The Root Cause Of Most Of Our Problems On Planet Earth

[Into the Night]

Okay, Parrot…thanks for that.





Even if you are correct here…still no killing.







Are you talking about a zygote or fetus?

Either can become a human life. Neither is.

And egg…is not a chicken. If you ordered a chicken dinner and they brought you an omelet, you would not accept it.



It is a zygote or fetus. It is no more “alive” than a tumor.

This argument sounds very religiously motivated to me. All of your arguments sound that way. If they are, please let me know they are.





Horse shit. Population control is about population control. No killing needed at all.





C’mon, Parrot. Let’s be real here.







He has not decided to ban you for any of those reasons. He would debate them and you from here to eternity.

He banned you for the personal stuff.

I am not bothered by that. If you act like an asshole to me…I will call you an asshole. (Probably I’d call you a fucking asshole.)







He CAN ban you from this thread if he wants.

Retro banning is allowed in this forum. All he needs do is notify a moderator to retro ban you...and you will be banned instantly. He is simply putting you on ignore. You are free to contribute…which you are doing.



Thank you for sharing the reasons for YOUR ban list.

Poli’s reasons are different.

Mine are different from Poli's...and from yours.






Ummm…I doubt you truly are not dealing with this from a religious standpoint.

We’ll continue to discuss this, but I am convinced your arguments are PRIMARILY motivated by religious considerations. There is absolutely nothing I see in human nature to sustain your arguments at all.

I strongly advocate for a woman’s right to abort a pregnancy occurring in her own body for whatever reasons she deems appropriate…and that includes a desire to lower the human population. I see nothing wrong with governments attempting to lower rising population…or with attempting to lower it...by influencing less procreation.

ASIDE: For the record, I was raised a Catholic…and am now what would be regarded as an agnostic. My agnosticism is:

I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't.

What is your position on the religious continuum?

I strongly suspect it is the PRIMARY motivation for you thesis.

An egg is not a chicken. It is a cell from a chicken. It is no different than drinking milk from a cow. A fertilized egg is a chicken. That egg won't wind up in an omelette at a restaurant. I also eat chickens (I used to raise the dumb things). A chicken is not a human life. You are making a falsie equivalence fallacy.

You have not addressed the question of what to do with accidental pregenancies and the rebellious. These are 'illegal' pregnancies. You say there is no killing. Yet there is...just as surely as you are killing a fertilized egg (which is now a life, regardless of how far that life has pregressed).

Did you know that mothers don't even KNOW if they're pregnant until the baby has grown past a certain point?

Destroying that life is killing. There is no other way to put it, no matter how you rationalize it.

 

[Into the Night]

Life does not begin at conception.

That's like saying sperm cells and egg cells are dead.

Life DOES begin at conception. It is no longer an egg cell or a sperm cell. It is a living, growing, human life.

 

[Ross Dolan]

An egg is not a chicken. It is a cell from a chicken. It is no different than drinking milk from a cow. A fertilized egg is a chicken. That egg won't wind up in an omelette at a restaurant. I also eat chickens (I used to raise the dumb things). A chicken is not a human life. You are making a falsie equivalence fallacy.

You have not addressed the question of what to do with accidental pregenancies and the rebellious. These are 'illegal' pregnancies. You say there is no killing. Yet there is...just as surely as you are killing a fertilized egg (which is now a life, regardless of how far that life has pregressed).

Did you know that mothers don't even KNOW if they're pregnant until the baby has grown past a certain point?

Destroying that life is killing. There is no other way to put it, no matter how you rationalize it.

Thank you for that.

The entirety of your argument still seems to me to be religiously motivated.

I ask again, what is your position on the religious continuum?

What is your religion?

 

[Into the Night]

Hello and goodbye AssHatZombie,



If you are going to stoop to personal attacks, then you forfeit your argument.

Personal attacks are the tool of those who do not feel confident in the merit of their argument.

Your rude judgement of other posters means you are abandoning the issue.

But the real loss is respect.

You've got none for me, and now I've got none for you.

And without basic respect, civil discourse is not possible.

Since I have no interest in insult contests, no future conversations between us shall occur.

Your name has been added to my permanent Ignore List.

Anybody else wanna tell me off? Please feel free to come forward right now.

I am interested in building an effective filter to enhance my experience here.

I only wanna talk to the good people.

Saw that one coming. Again, PoliTalker is banning someone for disagreeing with him. Again, he is locking himself out, not the one he is 'banning'.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Life DOES begin at conception. It is no longer an egg cell or a sperm cell. It is a living, growing, human life.

This is not, as you have suggested, an argument from human nature.

IT IS A RELIGIOUS ARGUMENT.

I think that is something that has to be dealt with...or we are just going to be going around in circles.

 

[Into the Night]

Thank you for that.

The entirety of your argument still seems to me to be religiously motivated.

I ask again, what is your position on the religious continuum?

What is your religion?

Irrelevant question.

 

[Into the Night]

This is not, as you have suggested, an argument from human nature.

Yes it is. It is human nature to reproduce. It is NOT human nature to kill our own kind for convenience or for meeting some kind of quota.

IT IS A RELIGIOUS ARGUMENT.

No, it isn't. Religion has nothing to do with it. You are confusing the position of some fundamentalist Christians with everyone else. This is a divisional error fallacy. You are doing this to try to build a bulverism fallacy.

I think that is something that has to be dealt with...or we are just going to be going around in circles.

Irrelevant. Religion is not part of this conversation, much as you want to make it such.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Destroying that life is killing. There is no other way to put it, no matter how you rationalize it.

I personally don't give a fuck.
No woman should have to carry a pregnancy to term for any reason if she doesn't wish to.

An abortion is like a haircut or a manicure.
You're simply purging unwanted cells from your body, which is anybody's right;

and any Stepford Wife bitch who takes the side of the misogynists on this issue is a total disgrace to her gender.
Imagine what a great nation this would be if all the Trumpanzees had been aborted before they did their part to fuck up America.

 

[PoliTalker]

I must reiterate.

Life does not begin at conception.

Sperm cells and eggs cells are alive, I tell you.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Yes it is. It is human nature to reproduce. It is NOT human nature to kill our own kind for convenience or for meeting some kind of quota.

I am a human, Parrot.

It is NOT in my nature to reproduce. In fact, I determined at a very early age I would avoid reproducing no matter what. I personally know several people who feel that way...and can assume there are even more that I do not know who do.

I suspect it is in your nature to do so...and you want, unwarrantedly, to universalize it.

No, it isn't. Religion has nothing to do with it. You are confusing the position of some fundamentalist Christians with everyone else. This is a divisional error fallacy.

Religion has everything to do with what you are saying.

Irrelevant. Religion is not part of this conversation, much as you want to make it such.

It is an inconvenient (for you) part of this conversation...which is the reason you are avoiding it.

When you stop avoiding it, we can continue.

To indulge you by pretending religion is not part of this conversation...is to arbitrarily cede significant parts of the argument to you.

I don't intend to do that.




TO POLI:

This actually is an integral part of the topic of this thread, but I would understand if you want to request that we take this particular elsewhere.

Just say the word...or I'll attempt to continue the discussion here.

 

[Into the Night]

I personally don't give a fuck.
No woman should have to carry a pregnancy to term for any reason if she doesn't wish to.

An abortion is like a haircut or a manicure.
You're simply purging unwanted cells from your body, which is anybody's right;

and any Stepford Wife bitch who takes the side of the misogynists on this issue is a total disgrace to her gender.
Imagine what a great nation this would be if all the Trumpanzees had been aborted before they did their part to fuck up America.

Redirection fallacy. This thread is not about abortion and whether it's right or not. It's about forcing one to give up their pregnancy for a mother that wants the child to meet a government quota. It's about killing.

 

[Into the Night]

I must reiterate.

Life does not begin at conception.

Sperm cells and eggs cells are alive, I tell you.

A fertilized cell is neither sperm nor egg. It is life. It will grow into a human being.

 

[Into the Night]

I am a human, Parrot.

It is NOT in my nature to reproduce. In fact, I determined at a very early age I would avoid reproducing no matter what. I personally know several people who feel that way...and can assume there are even more that I do not know who do.

I am referring to Man as a species, not you or anyone else personally. Divisional error fallacy.

I suspect it is in your nature to do so...and you want, unwarrantedly, to universalize it.

It is quite warranted. I am referring to Man as a species.

Religion has everything to do with what you are saying.

No, it doesn't.

It is an inconvenient (for you) part of this conversation...which is the reason you are avoiding it.

No, it's irrelevant.

When you stop avoiding it, we can continue.

I see no reason to use the requirement of bringing an unrelated subject into the conversation as an argument of the stick fallacy.

To indulge you by pretending religion is not part of this conversation...is to arbitrarily cede significant parts of the argument to you.

Not at all. It's simply irrelevant.

I don't intend to do that.

Obviously. You are trying to build a bulverism fallacy.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I am referring to Man as a species, not you or anyone else personally. Divisional error fallacy.

It is quite warranted. I am referring to Man as a species.

No, it doesn't.

No, it's irrelevant.

I see no reason to use the requirement of bringing an unrelated subject into the conversation as an argument of the stick fallacy.

Not at all. It's simply irrelevant.

Obviously. You are trying to build a bulverism fallacy.

Much more obviously you are avoiding the religion question because even you realize your stance is a product of your religion.

Hey...no problem. You religious people have been trying this nonsense for a long time...and for the most part, you strike out.

When you decide to answer...do it here. I'll take it from there.

NO RELIGIOUS ARGUMENTS ON THIS ISSUE STAND UP TO SCRUTINY.

 

[Into the Night]

Much more obviously you are avoiding the religion question because even you realize your stance is a product of your religion.

Hey...no problem. You religious people have been trying this nonsense for a long time...and for the most part, you strike out.

When you decide to answer...do it here. I'll take it from there.

NO RELIGIOUS ARGUMENTS ON THIS ISSUE STAND UP TO SCRUTINY.

Irrelevant. Redirection fallacy in an attempt to build a bulverism fallacy.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Irrelevant. Redirection fallacy in an attempt to build a bulverism fallacy.

Still avoiding.

No problem. Most of the religious nuts who oppose a woman's right to choose on the question...avoid it.

It falls apart easily.

Makes me wonder why you people want to switch to the "it is human nature" though.

That is even less tenable.