Abortion?

Another strawman job. You again ommit to quote Me, because you AGAIN lie and say that I said something when I clearly did not. Where do I claim that it was a scientific source? It is a science blog, based on scientific facts that we can easily check upon.

If you dispute it's accuracy, then simply tell Me which facts your dispute, and I will find you 5 reputable sources on each.

I, and the guy on the "blog", do not claim it is a scientific source.

By the way, I also found the blog I reakon YOU use for your sources. A List of Fallacies In Logic

You know the terms you use to pretend that you are smart and educated.

You do not even know how to use the terms properly.

By the way, the guy who runs the blog is often happy to come to a forum and blast phonies like you into dust personally. Maybe I will Drop him a line.

STOP TRYING TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT.
You are trying to reverse the burden of proof onto Me. It rests on you, because you make a claim. That claim is that a womb-trapped life-form is not human. Well, what species is it, then?

Common Sense (backed up by biology) says that the offspring is always the same species as the parents. There. You have yet to provide one single reason why it is not human.

All you are doing is resorting to arguing in circles and mis-quoting Me.

ANSWER REQUIRED : POST NUMBER 75 LINK : BigBlueWave.ca--Six Horrible Poor-Choice Arguments

Another strawman. What a surprise.

Simple. In your CLAIMS X and Y above, you refer to the exact same thing. A red box. In your argument with Me, My claim refers to many arguments, and you only refer to one (DNA ID) in your claim.

SO :
STT CLAIMS : The DNA test proves that the womb-trapped human life-form is a seperate entity from the mother. (VIA the mis-match of DNA, lack of interaction between the DNA of the 2 entities, common sense, direct observation, the fact the offspring is always the same species as the parents etc)

FF CLAIMS : Since the DNA is different between the mother and new entity in the womb, you must also believe that if 2 entities have the same DNA that automatically means the same life form.

Reply to Fatal Freedoms :

Seer TT: " You want to resort to "All opinions are equal" on a debate forum? "

FF : "No, not at all. I will be the first to say some opinions are much stronger and more eloquent than others. However to say your opinion is fact is utterly ridiculous."
What I reveal on the abortion page is the Truth,

Exactly why you are full of ****.

Quote:

Even the simple scientific facts you deny.

I wouldn't put a lot of stock in what you consider "fact" you throw the word around like it's pixie dust, and in doing so it looses all meaning.

Quote:

The reason why you suggested it is "opinion vs opinion" is because you want to back-pedal over certain parts of your argument.

No, because saying your opinion is fact is delusional.

Quote:

What you mean to say is that you believe all abortions are wrong.
Incorrect. What I said was clear : "Abortions are all murders".

Oh, I forgot you get to make up your own definitions.

See when i say "up" I actually mean "down", I don't use the lie-based dictionary created by the mentally deranged society that has advanced technology enough to the point where I can spout this nonsense over the internet to people I don't know all the while claiming to be "superior".

makes perfect sense.:thumbup:

Quote:

All I have said is that I am against Late-term abortions only.
By stating this, you prove that you cannot either recognise or accept the Forbidden Truths on abortions.

Uh-huh....

Quote:

Zygote =/= human child
Simply because you say so and use a ridiclulous symbol to lend legitimacy to your flagging arguments? The Forbidden Truth position was made clear : "Zygotes, embryos, fetuses, babies are ALL human children, and society invents needless and ridiculous labels so it can demonise and de-humanise them. Society does this to give you what you want : the legal right to murder helpless womb-trapped children".

It doesn't matter what kind of mental contortioning you have to do, this is not a baby:



It is a cell and to insist it has "rights" is ridiculous.

Quote:

There are differences between the 2. However, this is solely because we are dealing with 2 sepereate stages of development. The very term development is a good one, as it infers the Truth that we are dealing with the same thing.

yes, development INTO a human being.

Quote:

Incorrect. A Seer can easily see the whole issue of abortion, and it is straightforward and crystal clear. Further, inferiors are confused on abortion because they find Truth so hard to see and accept.

Claiming to have fictional credentials isn't impressing anyone.

Quote:

In response to Fatal Freedom's claim abortion is contriversial because it is unclear :
Seer TT : "Then why is the perception of musical taste not as controversial? No, it is contriversial because society is based on lies and myths, and the use of threats of violence, to control the citizen-slaves. However, abortion is such a blatantly obvious lie that some citizen-slaves can't help but see through the outer layers of deceit. However, only the Seer of Forbidden Truth can see through all the layers to the core of the lie....to get the Forbidden Truth. "

Music theory largely does not have moral ramifications.

Quote:

Have you ever been in a REAL debate, ya know with rules and stuff? I have, and I am familiar with most of the logical fallacies that people use.
A) If you understood logic, you would realise that the idea of "real" debates is ridiculous.

About as ridiculous as "real" grammar.

Quote:

B) You cannot fool Me that you simple read a website and use the terms to try and lend yourself legitimacy.

Okay, don't believe me. I don't really care.

Quote:

Seer TT : "It CANNOT be special pleading because your answer is nothing to do with what I am suggesting to you. "

I've heard that one before
I am sure someone like you would have heard that plenty of times, because you do not wither understand the terms propoerly, or cannot understand the point your opponent is making.

You can cry "nobody understands me" all you want, it's still nothing more than another one of your excuses.

If people habitually misunderstand you, then that is your problem, you should make yourself more clear, or better yet you could not use your made-up definitions, that might help. :thumbup:

Quote:

Dylan "Your answer has nothing to do with what I was suggesting to you."}
Yes, perfectly logical. BUT.... in your example, FF, 'Dylan' and 'Fatal' were both making statements about the french and war.

And you and I are both making statements about the link between DNA and identity. Whenever I provide an example showing a different relationship between DNA and identity you claim it is irrelevant.

Instead of refuting contrary examples you just dismiss them. Says a lot about your intellectual integrity.

Quote:

You are making insane statements to attempt and derail concrete scientific test results that do not address the points that I make.

No i'm simply stating that the "results" do not indicate what you believe they indicate. You're begging the question. You assume DNA is the only measure of identity and then you use examples of DNA testing to "prove" this.

This strikes me as very poor reasoning.

Quote:

Science was involved but it isn't a scientific matter. Right and wrong is philosophical issue.
I agree. However, the sp,e of the points themselves were scientific matters, and you have rejected science for belief in the abortion issue.

sp,e?

Maybe spell check would help clarify what you're attempting to say.

Quote:

Seer TT : "Why is being separate indicative of life value in some things and not others? The DNA test proved that the mother and the new lifeform were not part of the same body. "

Proving the DNA is different only proves the DNA is different.
Come on, there are logical conclusions we have to draw from a DNA test. You use such arguments against Carico in other threads.

And what logical conclusions are those?

Quote:

Q : How else can you possibly explain that the DNA is different in the womb-trapped life form (WTLF) and the mother?

I never said the DNA wasn't different.

Quote:

My conclusion fits all the facts.

Don't we all believe this?

Let me guess...... for you it's actually true?

:rollinglaugh:

Quote:

What about these girls? They share the same body.
So What? What is the point?

I have given you one example of where two bodies(clones) can have the same DNA and where one body(conjoined twins) has two DNA. These are important points that must be addressed when asserting that DNA is the only or the best measure of individual identity.

So don't give me that "what's your point" nonsense.

Address the facts or admit you were wrong.

Quote:

Stop pretending that you can't understand what "seperate life-form" means.

I know what it means, I want to know what you think it means. Since you admit that you don't use the dictionary.

Quote:

I told you what I mean when I said that "a new entity, a unique life/being". It is in that vein, as I already told you.

Does something have to be unique or new to be separate?

Even if this was the case how does this support your argument? Are old organisms or non-unique organisms less deserving of life?

Quote:

Seer TT : "You choose to answer to only one factor at a time. "
Duh!
Look at your crazy "hair" and "fingernail" comparisons to a WTLF. YOu use an analogy, you say all these have human DNA. True, but there are other factors. Like common-sense, visual analysis, the fact that the DNA in hair and fingernails has only a fraction of it's DNA active. The fact that a fingernail cannot grow into a new human being.

Common sense...is a bullshit argument you could use for anything.

Visual analysis...is very subjective.

Active DNA....even fully formed humans have a lot of inactive DNA.

Potential for life....Does not sperm also have the potential for life?




these are very weak arguments.

Quote:

You narrow the field to having human DNA only, then you apply this single factor to the argument. Then you wonder why I keep posting and telling you to look at all the factors at once.

What other factors. I've asked you for other factors and you still have not answered.

Quote:

Errr......did you actually read about the various scientific tests and abortion information I provided links to?

You only gave me a conservative blog site. Not exactly the pinnacle of scientific inquiry.



Seer TT : "FF, your plant example is not even an animal, we are talking about human entities in the womb. "
And why would it be the case in animals and not plants?
Plants do not have wombs or abortions, FF. Plants were not a part of the DNA tests. What plants do to reproduce is has no bearing on humans. Whether a WTLF is alive or not is not dependant on the reproductive systems of plants. etc, etc etc etc.......

Quote:

Do plants operate according to a different standard of Identity and if so, explain why.

Maybe they do. Does not matter.

Of course it does, you're just trying to skirt the issue. If plants and animals operate to the same standard of identity (and I don't see why they wouldn't) then any faulty standard of identity in plants would also apply to plants. After all both are groups of living organisms.

Quote:

But we can still know that you and I are not the same entity.

Of course, but you are not a zygote.

Quote:

We know that. FF, face it, there is simply no reason to suggest that the baby is part of the mother's body.

A baby is separate when it is born, but it is (as I contend) worthy of preservation long before that.

Quote:

Every common-sense, rational and sane argument, every DNA test, everything is telling you that the WTLF is NOT a part of the mother's body.

Saying it doesn't make it true.

Quote:

You position has become that of god-pushers "I put no evidence or proof forward, prove Me wrong or I a right". You are resorting to a quasi-religious belief in what life constitues, one that you cannot prove nor explain.

Funny you say that because most "god-pushers" actually agree with you on abortion.

Quote:

TRAVIS (out of context): "Clones do not have identical DNA."
FF, that is not the meaning of what I was saying, you took that out of context. You keep getting what YOU would mean by statements....not what the opponent means by them.

Don't give me "but you're taking it out of context" bull, you were caught in a flagrant lie.

You said that you did not say that, and I showed you were you did. There is no denying this. The fact is that you DID SAY THAT regardless of the context.

As usual you make excuses and try to weasel you're way out of it. If you cannot admit your mistakes you cannot expect us to respect your opinion, I've admitted it when I was wrong. Now it's your turn, you can either deny it and lose [SIZE="4"]all credibility[/SIZE] or you can just admit you were wrong. Your choice!

Quote:

Ask if you are not sure, do not presume. It IS My position that clones do not have identical DNA, however, I do not suggest that this must be in the DNA sequence itself. We have copy number variation

Isn't this the same thing I said about twins?

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You're just making excuses at this point.

Quote:

, expression of genes.

"expression of genes" is not DNA, the fact that the same genetic code can express itself in phenotype differently means it's not a difference of DNA.

Quote:

Life being life, we all mutate, all face deasese, we all are all unique even if the DNA seq is the same.

Be that as it may, it doesn't support your argument. You can't say "well, they are different and deserving of life because they have different DNA" and in the same breathe say "..but being different isn't limited to DNA".



Anybody reading this can see how contrived and convoluted your own arguments are. You can't even keep your story straight.

Won't work. You are trying to bury your previous posts, because you are wrong.

I will not play your game.

ANSWER REQUIRED :

BigBlueWave.ca--Six Horrible Poor-Choice Arguments

Answer if you know how. The argument that he makes is the same as I make. He opposes you. You refuse to answer, because you cannot just re-post garbage and get responses to get the argument off an a tangent. Your claim is "A 'zygote' is not human". You have nothing to support this claim, other than your retarded devotion to your personal definitions of words.

You claim you can rebutt, then do so.

Fine.
but Don't expect something from me that you yourself are not willing to do.
My offer was more than fair.

TRAVIS: "Clones do not have identical DNA."
FF, that is not the meaning of what I was saying, you took that out of context. You keep getting what YOU would mean by statements....not what the opponent means by them.
Don't give me "but you're taking it out of context" bull, you were caught in a flagrant lie.

Avoiding again.
You are just senseless, I told you you mis-understand what people say. You are just quote-mining to avoid the subject.

Your offer was nothing to do with the subject in question.

What kind of a moderator breaks all the rules himself?

You are just trying to change the subject.

Here are the arguments you wont answer :

BigBlueWave.ca--Six Horrible Poor-Choice Arguments

Even if you are right (you are not) and abortion is a "grey area":
As I said, since you admit that you are unsure, it's a "grey area" according to you, you cannot say that abortions are not murders. If you cannot be sure, how can you justify abortions if you admit you could be wrong.

That is reckless, it is like supporting shooting a gun through a door, not being sure what is on the other side.

If you are not sure, wouldn't you argue that abortion must be stopped at any stage of the pregnancy in case you were wrong?

The Truth is that any deliberate action that interferes with the natural cycle of life that causes death in the womb is an act of murder. Those who support abortion are actually animal-hating, child-hating, child-murder supporters.

I thought better of you, but you've shown to me you have not a shred of intellectual integrity. I showed you where you directly contradicted yourself.
You are wrong. You are quote-mining again, and I see that you again do not quote the source.

Really it's a shame that you can't even be honest about this. ...BLAH BLAH BLAH
You are without any sense. I am not being dishonest, you are quoing one part of a sentence, or one part of a paragraph used in a certain context.

My offer was that I would answer your blogsite questions if you answer the ones on mine. You won't accept my offer because you are afraid that I will find a better source that you won't be able to answer.
I asked you first....

and you refuse to answer. The reason I used that link is you refuse to honestly answer, so I will no longer waste time to debate you on abortion. No doubt you want to claim that proves your victory.

What rules have I broken?
The rules against posting abusive posts containing foul language. Using thread off-topic to launch attacks on the person etc. Put that in another thread, too.

You wont answer because you cant.

Just because I can't be 100% certain doesn't mean I won't pursue the answer that is most likely to be correct.
The point was you admit you dont really know the answer either way.

To assert a single cell has rights is absurd.
I do not assert that. I informed you that the Truth is that abortion is murder, I made that clear. Any womb-trapped life-form that has its natural growth/cycle interfered with causing its death is murder.

It's not my decision to make.

Avoiding the Q's again. How can you support abortion that is carried out at any stage, and claim it is not murder to do so, when you admit you don't really know the answer?

Do you honestly think that I believe murder is wrong because it destroys a chain of base pairs?
No. You deny that it is murder.

Okay I will answer you questions, but you have to promise that you will answer mine. Okay?

I promise nothing to no one. Even if I did, I am a liar, and to trust Me is ridiculous.

Now, you have not answered to those Q's. I will not debate you any further, until your side is "up to speed". After that, I will answer all posts put to Me, as always.

Eh?!?! A Liar who knows seeks truth!!

Go Figure