Thank you for trying to trap me in a “hypothetical” but even you know there is no right answer and the hypothetical isn’t real.
However I can do you one real question that should be answered by everyone; Please define the unborn?
I think there is a right answer. I would save the living baby. I think most people would.
To answer your question, the unborn are humans that are not self sufficient. I don’t necessarily think being human alone give one rights at all stages of development.
You can write in whatever form you like. I’m just saying pretty much no one uses italics because it looks like shit. And it’s also more helpful to respond to a quote from below the quoted spot and not above it.
You don’t have to “follow the crowd” but it would make your posts much easier to read and follow. Sometimes people do the same thing because it makes it easy.
I have no idea and I don’t intend to look it up for you at this moment. You also go back and forth between statistics being important, unimportant, using anecdotes, etc.
I’m guessing far more women would die from abortions in back alleys than in places designed to do it safely. Surely you’re aware that making abortion illegal won’t end it. It will just make it more dangerous. Again this is why your focus should be on increased access to contraceptives and schools teaching comprehensive sexual education and not abstinence only which is proven to be less effective.
The right answer is you let them all die and they go to heaven.
It’s okay. Don’t worry about it.
Fuck it, I’m in. (Again? I think I already fell in this once before)
Unborn: something that hasn’t been born yet.
Birth; as in to give birth; as in a verb. To be unborn, is something that hasn’t left the females body yet; medically speaking. This isn’t up for debate, and it also isnt argument at hand.
The bottom line is, it is in fact, a womans choice. The guy’s 5 minutes to shine, has zero, and I do mean zero ability to outweigh the 9 months of a womans body having to undergo significant hormonal, physical, and permanent changes. Let alone, the absolute worst case scenario, no matter how rare you seem to think it is (as if that takes away from the significance of it) that the woman was raped, and will be stuck caring for the child, that the… erhem… father… clearly wont be a part of. However you dont seem remotely interested in this argument, so we’ll gloss over the moral implications of that entire thought process briefly:
If 1 in 1,000,000 women are raped, and impregnated. They should be forced to carry the child to term for some misguided, obviously religiously driven honor system? So this one woman is less significant the embryo of a human that cant even be aware of it’s own existence? Theres no grey area here? There cannot be a single exception? It’s worth the chance of completely ruining 2 lives, as well as the reaching effects of anyone they come in contact with? All over a what-if? Compared to the alternative, of the abortion, the woman carries some mental and physical scars and can attempt to rebuild, instead of being physically reminded of being… fucking raped; every single day? For quite literally the rest of her life? This is provided she doesnt kill herself. Or doesnt project onto the child and ruin their life?
Like I said though, let’s just gloss over than an carry on.
I’m also going to breeze over this just to get to the next point, so just bare with me.
Sex isnt bad. It isnt evil. It isnt a sin. I dont care if you’re boarding your wife like a bad 2010’s planking meme, or your getting smacked with a raw piece of prime rib, tied up, while some backpages Dom slams her ass on you like shes trying to break your pelvis. Sex is fun. Sex is natural. Sex is completely normal. Very rarely in someone’s life, do they have sex with the intention of having a kid.
On to the point that really made my ass itch:
You are clearly against contraception. Why? We have the ability to greatly prevent the chance of unwanted pregnancies, which would lead to your great disdain of scraping babies out with a coat hanger. Why is that not okay with you? Does life start at sperm to you? Because I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if that’s the case, theres a house out in Rocky Point NC that has a mass grave bigger than any genocide or plague you’ve ever heard of, (and I believe you are just as guilty, friend) but I’m jumping to conclusions here, that’s simply the only reason I can see that you have here to dislike contraceptives. Please, provide me with logical reason supporting or refuting this case.
Is this completely subjective logical thought to you, or is it hard coded in your religion?
Humor me for something unrelated real quick:
How do you feel about gay people?
I’ll patiently await answers to everything with a question mark. No semantics, no bullshit, concise and to the point answers, preferably without italics.
If you really want to enjoy yourself I suggest the topic of catholic communion and how bread is LITERALLY human flesh. It was fun to see what Kneedragger considers evidence.
1 Like
Provided he can keep my interest, I’m pretty excited for this. Also, that last point is going to significantly alter my response.
However, that’s fucking insane. 50 years of aggressive and exponential science BE DAMMED, bread is meat.
Edit: how can you lift weights, or be even remotely nutritionally inclined, and not understand the basic fundamentals of macros¿¿¡
If you want to waste time reading nonsense:
The Catholic Thread
And that’s where I will stop reading that thread.
Kneedragger established years ago that he was unhinged.
mnben87 I understand why you initially believe that but what is the universal definition of when human life begins?
It also makes quoting easier to provide the specific text and I do that so you don’t have to worry about clicking the icon to provide the text; however I do copy the text.
Do you remember that kid from New Zealand, maliky(sp?) and it drove him nuts and I did it just to bother him. Maybe that habit never died ; )
Nice sidestep. I’m gong to guess you won’t look the numbers up because you know the data doesn’t support your claims.
Then look up the number of mothers who die in this day in this age of “safe, legal and rare abortions.” But those numbers won’t support your claim so you’ll have another copy of your excuse.
That is irrelevant. The argument is about when we can/should/want to define a life form as a human being.
You could always post them if it’s so easy.
I don’t think there is a universal definition. I think it is highly subjective. One could argue when born, when viable if removed from the womb, when thought occurs, when a heart beat occurs.
It’s a trick question.
Well he put out that it is universal. He has a burden of proof to show that. I just pointed out that it is subjective.