[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Pat, by not physically stopping what he believes to be murder is no different. [/quote]
Utter bullshit. You are grasping at straws.
So I think murder is wrong, it is now my job to go become Batman, and prevent all murder that happens or else I’m a hypocrite?
Stop being silly, this line of non-logic is horrid.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
but when does personhood start? [/quote]
Well that would be the basis for the entire argument. I happen to believe it starts at conception. Others tend to poo-poo the child until it is born as a “clump of cells” or a “parasite”, “tumor” even.
However, it is a unique and individual life, this we all know. It doesn’t matter what names you label that life in order to rationalize the ending of that life, it is still the life of an individual and unique person.
(The irony of someone who calls an unborn child a parasite or tumor and has the nerve to say that “americans are fucked up people” is astounding.)
I’m not playing semantics. I refuse to entertain this irrelevant rationalization. It is a human in the womb, it is alive, period. It may not be fully developed, but that doesn’t change what it is.
Shit you aren’t fully developed either, you grow, at least mentally, every day. [/quote]
That’s the problem with anti-abortionists; they bring up science and facts but science and facts do not, probably cannot, tell us when something is a person. The better argument would be to avoid whether or not a zygote is a human being (a person) and simply state why a zygote should be treated as a person. In other words, instead of trying to prove that a zygote is a human being by some scientific standard, just argue why it’s a human being from a conceptual standpoint. [/quote]
It’s in the science. It’s not our job to educate you, that’s your job. You need to support your position with facts, not suppositions.[/quote]
Personhood, whether or not someone or something is a person (human being) is not a scientific term. Science cannot and does not define the concept of being a person. So when you say it’s in the science you might want to actually do more than say it is. Show us the science. [/quote]
I am not talking about ‘personhood’, I am talking about human beings. I prefer to let human beings live to discuss philosophical matters such as personhood.
You nor anybody else has the right to take a human life when it does not pose a danger to yourself or others.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
No, it’s not. It’s not difficult if you look at the facts. [/quote]
What facts are those ?
[/quote]
We going to start over again? Not playing this game.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
This is an attempt at being clever but the truth is that yes, the abolitionists had to prove that slavery was wrong because slavery was legal. [/quote]
No offense, but it’s down right scary that you believe this and you aren’t the only one either. The law is always right unless proven otherwise? Down right scary.
Totally okay, it was the law, right?
[/quote]
Why read what isn’t there? Did I say it was right? This is what I meant as an attempt at being clever. It’s obvious you wanted me to fall into some “trap” to show that I agree with slavery or something. I simply stated that if you want the law changed then the burden of proof falls upon you whether you are right or wrong.
[/quote]
I wish I was that clever.
This “it is the law you have to prove otherwise” is the equivalent of burying you head in the sand. It’s exactly what many people did during slavery and during the holocaust.
What is your stance than, is abortion right or wrong? [/quote]
Anti-abortionists have two choices then: they can try to change the law through civil means or, as was the case with slavery, go to war. If abortion were illegal then it would be up to those who wanted it legal to prove their case. It goes both ways.
I have already stated that I am not in favor of abortion. I am pro-choice because I am not arrogant enough to think that my personal beliefs should be imposed upon others. I know some will call that hypocrisy but as another poster pointed out, there are children being killed all over the world. If life is so precious then why don’t they go save them as well? [/quote]
It’s hypocrisy to think that some laws are to be an imposition but others are not whether or not they are the same action.
And you are imposing you personal beliefs if you are arguing for abortion. Your position is weak. Abortion is either the taking of a human life, or it’s not. It’s either ok to take a human life or it is not. That’s the bottom line. It’s not ok to say ‘I wounldn’t do it, but I am not going to tell others not to do it’. I am not going rob a liquor store and I am not ok with others robbing a liquor store.[/quote]
If you actually believe it is murder and you should stop it then why aren’t you in prison for trying to stop it? If I saw a child in danger I would do whatever I could to save it. Are you kidnapping pregnant women outside of abortion clinics and holding them captive until they give birth? So you have your own hypocrisy that prevents you from taking that ultimate step. What are you afraid of? [/quote]
I am trying to stop it. Whether or not you think those steps are sufficient is your opinion and you are entitled to it, but I am doing my part. I don’t have to take matters to an extreme and go to jail to make changes. Busting into an abortion clinic, guns blazing wouldn’t do anything to help the cause; it would actually hurt it. I believe in forward progress.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
If you actually believe it is murder and you should stop it then why aren’t you in prison for trying to stop it? If I saw a child in danger I would do whatever I could to save it. Are you kidnapping pregnant women outside of abortion clinics and holding them captive until they give birth? So you have your own hypocrisy that prevents you from taking that ultimate step. What are you afraid of? [/quote]
Come on zecarlo, I don’t park my car in downtown Baltimore City just waiting for some thug to brandish a 9mm so I can stop a murder from happening. Even if I did, it would be pretty hard to stop the approx 40 murders a day in America… So why oh why does someone anti-abortion have to abduct (a crime) a pregnant woman and force them to give birth, otherwise they are a hypocrite?[/quote]
How am I a hypocrite for not believing we should legislate based on religion? By me saying a woman should have a choice I am guilty because I am doing nothing to stop abortion. Pat, by not physically stopping what he believes to be murder is no different. He may go further by using his vote to stop abortion but he could go further and chooses not to. [/quote]
Nobody is advocating legislation based on religion. The only people who consistently bring up religion are those in favor of abortions.
I advocate legislation based on facts. The facts are that the organism in utero is a human being. To destroy that organism is to kill a human being. Killing a human being is wrong and is illegal in most cases except for the case of abortion. So either killing human beings is wrong and should be illegal or it’s not. It’s absurd to advocate the killing of human being simply because they are in early stages of development. It’s either wrong to kill or it’s not. It really is that simple.
The law needs to give one way, or another. Either allowing killing in more circumstances, or not allow it. It needs to be at least consistent. Currently the law is not consistent.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
If you actually believe it is murder and you should stop it then why aren’t you in prison for trying to stop it? If I saw a child in danger I would do whatever I could to save it. Are you kidnapping pregnant women outside of abortion clinics and holding them captive until they give birth? So you have your own hypocrisy that prevents you from taking that ultimate step. What are you afraid of? [/quote]
Come on zecarlo, I don’t park my car in downtown Baltimore City just waiting for some thug to brandish a 9mm so I can stop a murder from happening. Even if I did, it would be pretty hard to stop the approx 40 murders a day in America… So why oh why does someone anti-abortion have to abduct (a crime) a pregnant woman and force them to give birth, otherwise they are a hypocrite?[/quote]
How am I a hypocrite for not believing we should legislate based on religion? By me saying a woman should have a choice I am guilty because I am doing nothing to stop abortion. Pat, by not physically stopping what he believes to be murder is no different. He may go further by using his vote to stop abortion but he could go further and chooses not to. [/quote]
I didn’t call you a hypocrite.
It’s absurd to call someone a hypocrite because they aren’t going to the extreme for something they disagree with.
[/quote]
Pat did. The way I look at it, if someone is going to throw out the word hypocrite when talking about abortion, then it has to be an all or nothing stance. You either go the extreme or you are a hypocrite. Pat cannot take a limited approach to stopping abortion then call someone else who does the same thing a hypocrite. [/quote]
Again, I’m not calling you a hypocrite, but…
You say you are against abortion in one breath, but okay with it in the next.
Pat says he’s against abortion and (according to him) he does everything legally within his power to end abortion.
That’s all I’m saying.
For the record I understand your argument. The issue is we aren’t talking about, I don’t know, pancakes here. “I don’t persoanlly like pancakes, but I would never force others to not eat pancakes if they want them.” We are talking about a third life being ended here. Again, I get it. There is a fundamental question that isn’t agreed upond. When is it a human life/person? We obviously (and Pat) disagree here.
I’m also not getting on your case. You seem like a level headed poster. [/quote]
That’s a terrible analogy. This isn’t about likes or dislikes. This is about human life. The idea that you personally wouldn’t take a human life, but you’re a-ok with with others doing it because you can’t tell them what to do is weak. You personally know it’s wrong, you know it’s the taking of a human life, but you are ok with others doing it? Then you should be likewise be ok with the Susan Smith’s and Casey Anthony’s of the world. What they did with their own children is nobody’s business but their own. Why should you impose your beliefs on people who feel it is ok to kill their own children? Their kids, their choice if they want to kill them then they should be able to. If it’s ok to kill your own children, then it should extend beyond the womb. Parents should have the right to kill their children, whether they are in the womb or not.
We cannot say simply because they are in the womb then it’s ok to take the human life, but when it is out, it is not. Whether or not you can see the child makes no impact on what the ‘thing’ actually is. It’s either ok to kill your own children or it’s not.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
If you actually believe it is murder and you should stop it then why aren’t you in prison for trying to stop it? If I saw a child in danger I would do whatever I could to save it. Are you kidnapping pregnant women outside of abortion clinics and holding them captive until they give birth? So you have your own hypocrisy that prevents you from taking that ultimate step. What are you afraid of? [/quote]
Come on zecarlo, I don’t park my car in downtown Baltimore City just waiting for some thug to brandish a 9mm so I can stop a murder from happening. Even if I did, it would be pretty hard to stop the approx 40 murders a day in America… So why oh why does someone anti-abortion have to abduct (a crime) a pregnant woman and force them to give birth, otherwise they are a hypocrite?[/quote]
How am I a hypocrite for not believing we should legislate based on religion? By me saying a woman should have a choice I am guilty because I am doing nothing to stop abortion. Pat, by not physically stopping what he believes to be murder is no different. He may go further by using his vote to stop abortion but he could go further and chooses not to. [/quote]
I didn’t call you a hypocrite.
It’s absurd to call someone a hypocrite because they aren’t going to the extreme for something they disagree with.
[/quote]
Pat did. The way I look at it, if someone is going to throw out the word hypocrite when talking about abortion, then it has to be an all or nothing stance. You either go the extreme or you are a hypocrite. Pat cannot take a limited approach to stopping abortion then call someone else who does the same thing a hypocrite. [/quote]
Again, I’m not calling you a hypocrite, but…
You say you are against abortion in one breath, but okay with it in the next.
Pat says he’s against abortion and (according to him) he does everything legally within his power to end abortion.
That’s all I’m saying.
For the record I understand your argument. The issue is we aren’t talking about, I don’t know, pancakes here. “I don’t persoanlly like pancakes, but I would never force others to not eat pancakes if they want them.” We are talking about a third life being ended here. Again, I get it. There is a fundamental question that isn’t agreed upond. When is it a human life/person? We obviously (and Pat) disagree here.
I’m also not getting on your case. You seem like a level headed poster. [/quote]
That’s a terrible analogy. This isn’t about likes or dislikes. This is about human life. The idea that you personally wouldn’t take a human life, but you’re a-ok with with others doing it because you can’t tell them what to do is weak. You personally know it’s wrong, you know it’s the taking of a human life, but you are ok with others doing it? Then you should be likewise be ok with the Susan Smith’s and Casey Anthony’s of the world. What they did with their own children is nobody’s business but their own. Why should you impose your beliefs on people who feel it is ok to kill their own children? Their kids, their choice if they want to kill them then they should be able to. If it’s ok to kill your own children, then it should extend beyond the womb. Parents should have the right to kill their children, whether they are in the womb or not.
We cannot say simply because they are in the womb then it’s ok to take the human life, but when it is out, it is not. Whether or not you can see the child makes no impact on what the ‘thing’ actually is. It’s either ok to kill your own children or it’s not.[/quote]
Is this direct at me? I am for abortion being illegal.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
If you actually believe it is murder and you should stop it then why aren’t you in prison for trying to stop it? If I saw a child in danger I would do whatever I could to save it. Are you kidnapping pregnant women outside of abortion clinics and holding them captive until they give birth? So you have your own hypocrisy that prevents you from taking that ultimate step. What are you afraid of? [/quote]
Come on zecarlo, I don’t park my car in downtown Baltimore City just waiting for some thug to brandish a 9mm so I can stop a murder from happening. Even if I did, it would be pretty hard to stop the approx 40 murders a day in America… So why oh why does someone anti-abortion have to abduct (a crime) a pregnant woman and force them to give birth, otherwise they are a hypocrite?[/quote]
How am I a hypocrite for not believing we should legislate based on religion? By me saying a woman should have a choice I am guilty because I am doing nothing to stop abortion. Pat, by not physically stopping what he believes to be murder is no different. He may go further by using his vote to stop abortion but he could go further and chooses not to. [/quote]
I didn’t call you a hypocrite.
It’s absurd to call someone a hypocrite because they aren’t going to the extreme for something they disagree with.
[/quote]
Pat did. The way I look at it, if someone is going to throw out the word hypocrite when talking about abortion, then it has to be an all or nothing stance. You either go the extreme or you are a hypocrite. Pat cannot take a limited approach to stopping abortion then call someone else who does the same thing a hypocrite. [/quote]
It’s hypocritical to believe killing your own kids is wrong, except if they are in the womb. If we are going to hold parents accountable for killing their kids then it needs to be consistent across the board.
What’s the difference between an abortion and killing your baby in the crib? Other then the method, there is no difference.
Should we allow parents to kill their own children or should we butt out? What’s the difference?
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
If you actually believe it is murder and you should stop it then why aren’t you in prison for trying to stop it? If I saw a child in danger I would do whatever I could to save it. Are you kidnapping pregnant women outside of abortion clinics and holding them captive until they give birth? So you have your own hypocrisy that prevents you from taking that ultimate step. What are you afraid of? [/quote]
Come on zecarlo, I don’t park my car in downtown Baltimore City just waiting for some thug to brandish a 9mm so I can stop a murder from happening. Even if I did, it would be pretty hard to stop the approx 40 murders a day in America… So why oh why does someone anti-abortion have to abduct (a crime) a pregnant woman and force them to give birth, otherwise they are a hypocrite?[/quote]
How am I a hypocrite for not believing we should legislate based on religion? By me saying a woman should have a choice I am guilty because I am doing nothing to stop abortion. Pat, by not physically stopping what he believes to be murder is no different. He may go further by using his vote to stop abortion but he could go further and chooses not to. [/quote]
I didn’t call you a hypocrite.
It’s absurd to call someone a hypocrite because they aren’t going to the extreme for something they disagree with.
[/quote]
Pat did. The way I look at it, if someone is going to throw out the word hypocrite when talking about abortion, then it has to be an all or nothing stance. You either go the extreme or you are a hypocrite. Pat cannot take a limited approach to stopping abortion then call someone else who does the same thing a hypocrite. [/quote]
Again, I’m not calling you a hypocrite, but…
You say you are against abortion in one breath, but okay with it in the next.
Pat says he’s against abortion and (according to him) he does everything legally within his power to end abortion.
That’s all I’m saying.
For the record I understand your argument. The issue is we aren’t talking about, I don’t know, pancakes here. “I don’t persoanlly like pancakes, but I would never force others to not eat pancakes if they want them.” We are talking about a third life being ended here. Again, I get it. There is a fundamental question that isn’t agreed upond. When is it a human life/person? We obviously (and Pat) disagree here.
I’m also not getting on your case. You seem like a level headed poster. [/quote]
That’s a terrible analogy. This isn’t about likes or dislikes. This is about human life. The idea that you personally wouldn’t take a human life, but you’re a-ok with with others doing it because you can’t tell them what to do is weak. You personally know it’s wrong, you know it’s the taking of a human life, but you are ok with others doing it? Then you should be likewise be ok with the Susan Smith’s and Casey Anthony’s of the world. What they did with their own children is nobody’s business but their own. Why should you impose your beliefs on people who feel it is ok to kill their own children? Their kids, their choice if they want to kill them then they should be able to. If it’s ok to kill your own children, then it should extend beyond the womb. Parents should have the right to kill their children, whether they are in the womb or not.
We cannot say simply because they are in the womb then it’s ok to take the human life, but when it is out, it is not. Whether or not you can see the child makes no impact on what the ‘thing’ actually is. It’s either ok to kill your own children or it’s not.[/quote]
Is this direct at me? I am for abortion being illegal. [/quote]
No, sorry.
[quote]pat wrote:
No, sorry.[/quote]
No biggie, I just wanted clarificaiton.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
If you actually believe it is murder and you should stop it then why aren’t you in prison for trying to stop it? If I saw a child in danger I would do whatever I could to save it. Are you kidnapping pregnant women outside of abortion clinics and holding them captive until they give birth? So you have your own hypocrisy that prevents you from taking that ultimate step. What are you afraid of? [/quote]
Come on zecarlo, I don’t park my car in downtown Baltimore City just waiting for some thug to brandish a 9mm so I can stop a murder from happening. Even if I did, it would be pretty hard to stop the approx 40 murders a day in America… So why oh why does someone anti-abortion have to abduct (a crime) a pregnant woman and force them to give birth, otherwise they are a hypocrite?[/quote]
How am I a hypocrite for not believing we should legislate based on religion? By me saying a woman should have a choice I am guilty because I am doing nothing to stop abortion. Pat, by not physically stopping what he believes to be murder is no different. He may go further by using his vote to stop abortion but he could go further and chooses not to. [/quote]
I didn’t call you a hypocrite.
It’s absurd to call someone a hypocrite because they aren’t going to the extreme for something they disagree with.
[/quote]
Pat did. The way I look at it, if someone is going to throw out the word hypocrite when talking about abortion, then it has to be an all or nothing stance. You either go the extreme or you are a hypocrite. Pat cannot take a limited approach to stopping abortion then call someone else who does the same thing a hypocrite. [/quote]
Again, I’m not calling you a hypocrite, but…
You say you are against abortion in one breath, but okay with it in the next.
Pat says he’s against abortion and (according to him) he does everything legally within his power to end abortion.
That’s all I’m saying.
For the record I understand your argument. The issue is we aren’t talking about, I don’t know, pancakes here. “I don’t persoanlly like pancakes, but I would never force others to not eat pancakes if they want them.” We are talking about a third life being ended here. Again, I get it. There is a fundamental question that isn’t agreed upond. When is it a human life/person? We obviously (and Pat) disagree here.
I’m also not getting on your case. You seem like a level headed poster. [/quote]
Where did I say I was OK with it? Look, one person is against it and believes they shoulf force to stop it. Another believes their vote or other legal avenues are as far as they should go. I believe that legislation is too far. If the real issue is preventing abortions then IMO legislation won’t really do much in that regard.
Also, where did I disagree that a zygote or fetus is a human being/person? I simply pointed out that there is a legal and dictionary definition of what a person is and it does not and cannot apply to a zygote. Take 5 pictures: a girl, a boy, a man, a woman and a zygote. Show them to most people and ask them to pick the one that isn’t a person and see which one gets picked. What makes a person a person? How many of those criteria are demonstrated by a zygote? Human life does not equal human being/person. Again, I’m not saying that a zygote is not a human being or that I am in favor of abortion. What I’m saying is that the anti-abortion argument is flawed.
[quote]pat wrote:
I advocate legislation based on facts. The facts are that the organism in utero is a human being. [/quote]
That is not a fact and that is why your argument is flawed. Either change the definition of human being or show how the accepted definition applies to a zygote. That’s where your argument needs to start.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
What I’m saying is that the anti-abortion argument is flawed. [/quote]
Only to people without logic, morals or rational thought.
Mental and moral contortionists may see it as flawed, but that doesn’t mean it is.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Where did I say I was OK with it?
[/quote]
You are implicitly okay with abortion when you are not against other people (in most cases) getting abortion because, “It’s their body & right.”
Things we legisalte against, but that still happen:
Why is legislation against murder not “too far,” but legislation against abortion is?
This agrument that legislation won’t stop abortion is also a bad one, imo. I doubt those who would get an abortion legally would all of a sudden start perfroming coat hanger abortions if it were made illegal.
[quote]
Also, where did I disagree that a zygote or fetus is a human being/person? I simply pointed out that there is a legal and dictionary definition of what a person is and it does not and cannot apply to a zygote. Take 5 pictures: a girl, a boy, a man, a woman and a zygote. Show them to most people and ask them to pick the one that isn’t a person and see which one gets picked. What makes a person a person? How many of those criteria are demonstrated by a zygote? Human life does not equal human being/person. Again, I’m not saying that a zygote is not a human being or that I am in favor of abortion. What I’m saying is that the anti-abortion argument is flawed. [/quote]
You’re first sentence above and the follow up are contradictions. You say you don’t disagree that a zygote/fetus is a human/person then make a case as to why they are not human/person.
You could show most people a picture of Clinton, Obama, Bush, and Taft, and most people would not know ALL of them were Presidents of the United States. Doesn’t mean Taft wasn’t a president.
Look, in all seriousness, I am not a hardliner like many here. We keep talking about zygotes like most abortions involve a zygote, the bottom line is, fetus’ (That look like very small people) are still being aborted well into a pregnancy. How often does a person even know they are pregnant when the fetus is still a zygote? Probably a small percentage.
The anti-abortion argument is not flawed. A third party is killed in the process. Fancy smanshy words, made up to allow murder, don’t change the fact that a fetus is “an entity with a striking resemblance to a human being” aka a person.
The abortion argument is 100% semantics.
Supposedly 12 weeks. What does that look like to you?
A. An Elephant
B. A person
C. A Dog
D. An ant
“The earlier an abortion is provided the safer it is, because earlier abortions are less complicated. Therefore, it is important that women who decide to get abortions can do so without unnecessary delays. In fact, 88% of all abortions in the United States are obtained within the first 12-13 weeks after the last menstrual period (LMP). Sometimes, however, women have compelling reasons to obtain abortions in later weeks.”
http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/after_12_weeks.html
Not a single cell zygote, but what’s in the picture…
These sure are some great reason to get an abortion:
Reasons for abortions[edit]Another study, in 1998, revealed that in 1987-1988 women reported the following as their primary reasons for choosing an abortion:[48][49] The source of this information, takes findings into account from 27 nations including the United States, and therefore these findings may not be typical for any one nation.
25.9% Want to postpone childbearing.
21.3% Cannot afford a baby
14.1% Has relationship problem or partner does not want pregnancy
12.2% Too young; parent(s) or other(s) object to pregnancy
10.8% Having a child will disrupt education or job
7.9% Want no (more) children
3.3% Risk to fetal health
2.8% Risk to maternal health
2.1% Other
8.2% are health related. The other 91.8% are bull shit justifcations for murder.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States#Current_legal_situation
Liberty and justice for all…unless you’re a fetus.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You are implicitly okay with abortion when you are not against other people (in most cases) getting abortion because, “It’s their body & right.”
Things we legisalte against, but that still happen:
Why is legislation against murder not “too far,” but legislation against abortion is?
This agrument that legislation won’t stop abortion is also a bad one, imo. I doubt those who would get an abortion legally would all of a sudden start perfroming coat hanger abortions if it were made illegal.
You’re first sentence above and the follow up are contradictions. You say you don’t disagree that a zygote/fetus is a human/person then make a case as to why they are not human/person.
You could show most people a picture of Clinton, Obama, Bush, and Taft, and most people would not know ALL of them were Presidents of the United States. Doesn’t mean Taft wasn’t a president.
Look, in all seriousness, I am not a hardliner like many here. We keep talking about zygotes like most abortions involve a zygote, the bottom line is, fetus’ (That look like very small people) are still being aborted well into a pregnancy. How often does a person even know they are pregnant when the fetus is still a zygote? Probably a small percentage.
The anti-abortion argument is not flawed. A third party is killed in the process. Fancy smanshy words, made up to allow murder, don’t change the fact that a fetus is “an entity with a striking resemblance to a human being” aka a person.
The abortion argument is 100% semantics. [/quote]
I’m not OK with people smoking but if I believe they have the right to choose does that mean I really am OK with it?
What’s more important? Criminalizing abortion or stopping it?
There is not contradiction. I said I believe a zygote is a person but the definition of person does not apply to a zygote.
Defining a person by their job or title is not analogous to defining their personhood.
Why is abortion legal? Because the law does not recognize a fetus or zygote as a person. The law has a set of criteria for recognizing personhood. Show how that should apply to a fetus and/or zygote.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
I’m not OK with people smoking but if I believe they have the right to choose does that mean I really am OK with it?
[/quote]
Do you believe smokers should be allowed to smoke on public transportation? IE where that decision hurts another party?
Stopping it is much more important. How does a free society attempt to stop an activity that has been deemed detrimental to society?
They make laws to stop it. Does it always work? No of course not. Does that mean we decriminalize everything, no.
The contradiction is where you say you are against abortion, but are not against abortion…Again, zygotes aren’t being aborted. 12 week old fetus’ are. The one that look exaclty like mini copies of you and me.
Okay?
[quote]
Why is abortion legal? Because the law does not recognize a fetus or zygote as a person. The law has a set of criteria for recognizing personhood. Show how that should apply to a fetus and/or zygote. [/quote]
In the past the law hasn’t recognized a black “entity” as a person.
It should apply to a zygote and a fetus because we know for a fact that unhindered these cells will end up like you or I. We know for a fact that you and I were once at this stage of development. When does it become a person? My answer is, it doesn’t matter when because, all things being equal, it is inevitable.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
In the past the law hasn’t recognized a black “entity” as a person. [/quote]
lol, his mind is so closed here, he literally can’t see that he makes the same arguments that were made for justification of slavery, in order to justify abortion.
Doesn’t even see that…
Not even for a second, even when it is pointed out to him.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
The contradiction is where you say you are against abortion, but are not against abortion…
In the past the law hasn’t recognized a black “entity” as a person.
It should apply to a zygote and a fetus because we know for a fact that unhindered these cells will end up like you or I. We know for a fact that you and I were once at this stage of development. When does it become a person? My answer is, it doesn’t matter when because, all things being equal, it is inevitable.[/quote]
I never said that however.
I don’t think that blacks were not considered persons. I believe the wording used early on was “other persons” to describe slaves. From the Constitution: The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.
What something can become does not define what it is.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
In the past the law hasn’t recognized a black “entity” as a person. [/quote]
lol, his mind is so closed here, he literally can’t see that he makes the same arguments that were made for justification of slavery, in order to justify abortion.
Doesn’t even see that…
Not even for a second, even when it is pointed out to him. [/quote]
The thing is that it is not the same argument. You actually believe the pro-slavery side claimed blacks were not human beings? The Greeks thought their slaves were not human beings?