Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. A theocracy doesn't 'create' God. God IS, regardless what kind of government a nation has. Why not just say you don't believe there is a God?
2. I don't believe the issue is 'health funding'. I believe it is 'abortion funding'.
1. And he has no say over our laws . If he wants such say then he needs to get his rosy little ass off his chair and run for office. I am also a pagan.
Not even the same realities. You are comparing the abuse of a sentient being to a fetus who can't survive without extreme medical intervention.
You're missing the purpose of the comparison.
The comparison is done to illustrate why pro-lifers choose to "get in your business".
In order to properly convey the message, I have to use an example that both sides agree has value. This allows you to see the thought process of a pro-lifer. The desire to protect the innocent life.
The analogy still stands and is still accurate. The thought process is still the same.
The only difference is that your side does not value the life of the unborn baby, but pro-lifers do. But if you can take away your desire to veer from the point and look at the analogy for what it is meant to convey, then perhaps you'll walk away with a greater understanding of why pro-lifers don't just "mind their own business".
The comparison is done to illustrate why pro-lifers choose to "get in your business".
In order to properly convey the message, I have to use an example that both sides agree has value. This allows you to see the thought process of a pro-lifer. The desire to protect the innocent life.
The analogy still stands and is still accurate. The thought process is still the same.
The only difference is that your side does not value the life of the unborn baby, but pro-lifers do. But if you can take away your desire to veer from the point and look at the analogy for what it is meant to convey, then perhaps you'll walk away with a greater understanding of why pro-lifers don't just "mind their own business".
not all sides agree "life" is the same definition. so the analogy isn't accurate. even if it was you still have to negate inside the womb and outside the womb. you can't get around that.
geez you like to paly dense. viability does matter in or out of the womb.
I don't need to make a compelling argument about life. life has different meaning to different people and different situations. in the case of abortion is is up to a woman who has the pregnancy. her choice, her values. not your's
No. Life is or isn't. The whole idea of interpreting when it begins is just a failure of humanity to understand it.
And you tend to do things like call me dense, but you have lacked any logical analysis in your posts. They tend to be composed of the intellectual equivalent of, "This is the way it is... so there!"
And you still avoided addressing the contradictions you have.
If a baby isn't alive before birth, then why are you against abortion in the 9th month?
I am guessing that it's something that you ate unable to rectify in your mind.
no it can't be ignored. we all have the right to privacy. end of story. not an attempt to change the issue, that IS the issue. privacy, in other words none of your business.
you want to take choice away from women to save a life. taking away anyone's choice is control, like it or not. open your eyes.
again a one year old is far different than an 8 week old fetus. try to get that through your head.
You deflect from the real issue.
You have no reasoned argument beyond stomping your feet.
Bristol Palin didn`t get knocked up from abstinence.
She got knocked up from copulating.
Imagine if her Mom would have talked to her about Birth Control .... she probably wouldn't have TWO bastard babies running around by what may be two different Baby Daddies ...
not all sides agree "life" is the same definition. so the analogy isn't accurate. even if it was you still have to negate inside the womb and outside the womb. you can't get around that.
Again, the purpose of the analogy was not to define a start of life.
The purpose of the analogy was to foster understanding of why a person would get in your business. The purpose for the pro-lifer is to save a life.
An honest pro-abortion activist would at least acknowledge that it is consistent for someone who believes the baby's life to have value to get in your business. It is intellectually dishonest and borderline sociopathic to acknowledge that someone can believe the baby to be alive, but expect them to mind their own business.
The comparison is done to illustrate why pro-lifers choose to "get in your business".
In order to properly convey the message, I have to use an example that both sides agree has value. This allows you to see the thought process of a pro-lifer. The desire to protect the innocent life.
The analogy still stands and is still accurate. The thought process is still the same.
The only difference is that your side does not value the life of the unborn baby, but pro-lifers do. But if you can take away your desire to veer from the point and look at the analogy for what it is meant to convey, then perhaps you'll walk away with a greater understanding of why pro-lifers don't just "mind their own business".
I don't care the reasoning behind your compression. The point is you can't compare the abuse of a child to the abortion of a fetus. They aren't in anyway comparable situations. While an anti abortion activist will say they are concerned with the life of the fetus I wonder how much they is true. They are also the same ones that demand cuts to social welfare and programs that support said children. I think the stronger reality is they are concerned with pushing their religious views on everyone else.
No. Life is or isn't. The whole idea of interpreting when it begins is just a failure of humanity to understand it.
And you tend to do things like call me dense, but you have lacked any logical analysis in your posts. They tend to be composed of the intellectual equivalent of, "This is the way it is... so there!"
And you still avoided addressing the contradictions you have.
If a baby isn't alive before birth, then why are you against abortion in the 9th month?
I am guessing that it's something that you ate unable to rectify in your mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winning Guy
You deflect from the real issue.
You have no reasoned argument beyond stomping your feet.
funny my reasoning is the same as the law of the land. no foot stomping about it. it's legal. I am pro choice. could care less if you can't understand the distinctions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. If he wants such say then he needs to get his rosy little ass off his chair and run for office. I am also a pagan.