Best Pro-Life argument and best Pro-Choice argument? (single, own, city)

[newtovenice]

Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801

That's an idiotic response to what I said, but expectedly so.

No, I'm applying the same logic to an equivalent circumstance.

In abortion, a woman destroys the bodily autonomy of a baby. Her needs are MOST important. The harm is irrelevant.

In rape, a man destroys the bodily autonomy of a woman. His needs are MOST important. The harm is irrelevant.

Since we need to make sure woman can safely kill babies, it makes logical sense that men should be able to safely rape women.

Your argument, not mine. /shrug/

[Mightyqueen801]

Originally Posted by newtovenice

No, I'm applying the same logic to an equivalent circumstance.

In abortion, a woman destroys the bodily autonomy of a baby. Her needs are MOST important. The harm is irrelevant.

In rape, a man destroys the bodily autonomy of a woman. His needs are MOST important. The harm is irrelevant.

Since we need to make sure woman can safely kill babies, it makes logical sense that men should be able to safely rape women.

Your argument, not mine. /shrug/

No, it's not. It is your way of thinking, and there is no logic in it whatsoever. Please own it yourself and do not assign it to others. Thank you.

[newtovenice]

Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801

No, it's not. It is your way of thinking, and there is no logic in it whatsoever. Please own it yourself and do not assign it to others. Thank you.

Explain the difference between a man taking possession of a woman's body and a woman taking possession of a baby's baby to do with the bodies what they want.

There. Is. No. Difference.

[RoyaleWithCheese]

Originally Posted by Clintnon

Personhood, as vague as that concept is, tends to refer to whether or not we should treat organisms as people, I'd say. I'd say that's more relevant.

So your position is that if you swat flies, eat meat, etc. then you should be pro-choice?

[RoyaleWithCheese]

Originally Posted by Clintnon

I agree with that...keeping in mind that they're either forced to exist, or forced not to, and have no free will regardless of what occurs to them...and that a painless abortion would be identical to going into a deep sleep to them, and therefore the closest thing they have to free will would definitely prefer that over the discomfort of being born...and that, because fetuses have no free will, it's up to we adults to determine what's best for them...keeping in mind that death doesn't exist for them, so they can't be harmed by it, and that, though they can be harmed by the potential pain of an abortion, even the birthing process itself is likely uncomfortable, so we'd need to weigh pain of abortion against other forms of pain they might experience as a result of not being aborted before even being confident that the abortion causes them more pain than assistance.

Someone could kill you in your sleep and you wouldnt feel anything, you just wouldnt wake up.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by Clintnon

No...you and I have an ethical obligation to deem whether or not another human's life has value. Not only that, we all inevitably do, whether through action, or inaction. Through our action, or inaction, we either force a baby to come into the world, or to not. Either way, we are making decisions about the worth of the life form. Now, the worst possible decision we can make about that is not to make a decision about the worth of the life form. That's just the equivalent of us sticking our heads into the sand and ignoring a problem and our responsibilities.

No, we do not. The only obligation we have is to NOT cause or support the termination of an innocent human's life. I'll repeat this again... It's how we treat the most vulnerable members of society that defines our collective conscience. Quite clearly, many have no problem whatsoever being or supporting the ruthless killers of the innocent who can neither speak for nor defend themselves. That's the ultimate manifestation of a highly oppressive society.

[hothulamaui]

Originally Posted by newtovenice

Explain the difference between a man taking possession of a woman's body and a woman taking possession of a baby's baby to do with the bodies what they want.

There. Is. No. Difference.

Men abusing or raping a woman is much different than a woman controlling her body as she sees fit. Try as you might to make it equal it isn’t. Two different topics.

[jdaelectro]

Originally Posted by newtovenice

Explain the difference between a man taking possession of a woman's body and a woman taking possession of a baby's baby to do with the bodies what they want.

There. Is. No. Difference.

It's actually worse.

Killing a defenseless baby, is worse and much more degenerate than rape.

[Clintnon]

Originally Posted by newtovenice

You are being disingenuous.

If no one can benefit from being here, as you are proposing than just go kill whomever you want at any time for any reason. Burn, loot, murder, rape, steal, child abuse and pedophilia. Go do it all, newbie poster, here to agitate.

I don't believe you believe a word of your own posts. Here for one reason and one reason only.

No...I am not being disingenuous, and you have absolutely no reason to think I was. I, on the other hand, have reason to think you are being disingenuous, because you chose to translate my phrase in a manner in which my views sound as horrible as possible, when you didn't have to.

There is nothing about believing we don't necessarily benefit from being here that implies I believe any of the things you suggested. Your statement confuses me so much that I don't even know how to explain to you where you're wrong, nor should I be expected to spend the time on such things. You have done the exact equivalent of saying 2+2= 5. I can only respond to that with silence, or simply saying "no."

Obviously, I'm not here to agitate. Where I here to agitate, I would not be putting such detail and effort into explaining my views as I have. I am here to engage in intelligent discussion.

[Clintnon]

Originally Posted by newtovenice

Every pro abortion argument seeks to justify accessibility to killing.

It never addresses why killing is WRONG.

And every anti-abortion argument never addresses how killing can assist life forms, and typically involves people pretending that all killing is wrong, even in circumstances when it is provably not.