Originally posted by FearlessLeader2
If I recall correctly, that is what I asked you.
No. You mixed the case of being inconscious with the fact of being nonexistant.
You spoke of the father having a say-so in the matter. In america he does not.
The father has a say-so in the matter. Still, the woman is the only one who is pregnant, so she's the only one who has the right to decide. The father is only consultative.
No, I consider that fact that if nature takes its course, this child will be a fully developed human being in less than a year as meaning that he/she has the same rights I do.
That's absurd.
Someone covered Pascal's Wager. I wasn't speaking on God's behalf either, I was cautioning you to avoid His notice while you're this far opposed to His views. Once again, you take something I say, and respond to it as if I said somethingelse entirely.
Not at all. You are the one acting like if he knew the views of God. For what you know, I could be closed to His views than you are. That is a sin of pride.
Scarecrows, as I refer to straw men, are arguments or facts that support a position contrary to a position that is falsely attributed to the other side in a debate. The usual use for this tactic is to avoid replying to a valid point made by that opposition.
For example, I say (in a debate about whether chocolate is better than vanilla) that chocolate is far more popular. You then respond with something like 'Oh yeah? Well pears taste delicious!' It has nothing to do with what I said, and implies that I don't like pears. It also allows you to avoid responding to my citing of chocolate lovers' statistics.
You do this crap all the time. I say something, and you start talking about something completely tangental, and acting like I have taken some idiotic stance on this tangental material. If you stop doing it, I'll stop pointing out that you are.
Funny. *I* answer straight to the point, while you just send "sacrecrow" here and there. Perhaps you should have a look in the mirror.
As to the miscarriage rate, once again, I'm not talking about miscarriage. I'm talking about the children that women are trying to get rid of like stubborn stains.
You argued that an embryo WILL become a children. I just reminded you that up to one time out of four, this embryo will just end in a miscarriage. So much for the "hopes".
First, comatose is a hell of a lot worse than unconscious. Unconscious people can be roused, sometimes with difficulty, but they can be roused.
As to the second, just because the baby has not yet developed a mind, this does not exclude him from membership in the human race. He has human DNA, human parents, is developing human organs, etc... You are seeking to exclude him from the 'club' based solely on his current level of mental development. This is either age or mental handicap based discrimination, and there are no other ways about it. Pick either age or mental handicap based discrimination, and defend that position. I am not about to let you have your cake and eat it too. You want to discriminate based on one of those two factors, fine, but you WILL bloody well defend it, or you will shut up and concede that abortion is murder.
*sigh*
Can't make you understand the simple fact that there is a difference between having a mind and not having one, hu ?
Still focusing on the "age discrimination" ? You completely miss the point.
Abortion is NOT murder, because embryo is NOT a human being. Simpel as that. If your logic is so twisted that your consider hope is as good as reality, that's your problem.
And the fact that the embryo (NOT the baby) has not developed a mind DOES exclude it from membership in the human race.
Let's clear the air here. We're not talking about rocks, we're talking about a human embreyo. You say it doesn't have a mind as if it never will (true enough if you get to kill it before it can), but the truth is, it simply hasn't grown a brain yet. This puts it at a serious disadvantage compared to you or me. It is handicapped, mentally, by the lack of a brain. You can bandy about whatever semantics you care to spout, but that is the crux of the matter. Fetuses and embreyos are mentally handicapped by underdeveloped brains, and you want to treat them as non-human for that reason alone.
I will refrain to make all kind of joke about you being mentally handicapped and me still considering you human. But it's really a missed opportunity.
You're again twisting my words just so you can present your side as the Holy One. I'm refusing to consider something that has NO mind as human. Not someone that is mentally handicapped.
handicapped mind != no mind
Not too hard for you ?
Embryo are not mentally handicapped. They are mentally NONEXISTANT. And THAT is the difference.
This. Is. Wrong. Evil. Morally. Repugnant. Foul. Just. Plain. Bad. Do you understand the words that are coming out of my keyboard?
You. Are. A. Backward. Fanatic. That. Has. Twisted. Ethics. And. Morals. Just. So. They. Can. Fit. His. Dark. Age. Visions.
And you, do I need to spell it again or did you recently become aware of that strange thing called "common sense and logic" ?
And it is my duty to strive to let my fellow man do the same, even if it means trying to protect him from his fellow man.
I wholehearty encourage any attempt to protect fellow men against injustice from other fellow men.
What I condemn is to hurt a fellow (wo)man to protect a mindless thing.
If she didn't want the pregnancy, she could have said no to sex. If the father didn't want to be a father, he could have said no to sex. The only one that didn't get a choice in the matter was the child. How is that fair? How is that pro-CHOICE?
That's the same old backward argument from biggots.
Sex is something natural in relationship, and is, mind you, enjoyable. Following your logic, if someone is flattened by a car, it's his fault, he should have not crossed the street. Hit by lightning ? He should have not walked outside during a storm. With such logic, humans should spend their whole lives recluse in their houses in fear of what could happen if they get out.
The child have no choice ? WHAT child ? There is no child, just an embryo. A mindless THING. Of course a THING doesn't have a choice. I don't ask my hand if it agrees before using it.
You don't mind about the millions of spermatozoids that die during sexual intercourse. I don't mind about the embryo that has the same fate. It's the same thing, except your twisted visions grant to this pack of cell the right to harm the life of two people
Tell me, when you say something this facile, does it ever make you wince?
No I mean that even though she is dead, and can no longer have any say in the matter, her final wishes are respected, even though she cannot even thank those who so respect them.
The whole thing is still to respect in death what the person was IN LIFE. It's a way to act like if the death was not totally the end for all, like if the soul still does exist after that.
Perhaps it's true, perhaps it's false, can't know it until I'm dead. But the whole thing is still referring to someone who lived and had a mind. Not to a thing that never developped it from its own.
Teen? 
I'm 32. I've held babies in my arms. I will never stop fighting to protect them from the likes of you.
Gosh...
I said "teen" because I just couldn't believe that anyone past 16 would use childish sentences like "I own this argument". The fact that you are twice this age is even more frightening.
I've held babies in my arms too. Babies that are members from the human race. Race that I will always protect from backward biggot that never hesitate to twist logic and facts just so they can fit their fanatical views.
At the risk of being considered a pretentious teen out to puff up his ego (as if I needed to do it myself...), I can assure you that almost all of the quotes are taken out of text, and that the others have nothing to do with the subject, but bear on questions of obedience, respect, and other virtues.
I already told that I'm quite ignorant about biblical studies. This site was just food for thoughts for people who are in the subject.
I personnally couldn't care less, as I don't rely on the Bible to dictate my ethos.
