Questions for theists

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.

This is 100% correct, FF. There is more to brain function than IQ.

The Forbidden Truth is that brain function in humans, despite increasing in cognitive ability, is decreasing in stability and Truth-handling ability.

One manifestation of this is todays mental health problems, which I am sure you mistakenly think I am afflicted with.

Overall, human brain function has devolved, despite the IQ improvements.

This is correct. Societal leaders of human society have INVENTED this morality to preserve thier insane and illegitimate societal structures. However, those human soietal structures have no legitimacy.

Moraility refered to the humanised version of morality. Perhaps I should have been clearer. You yourself admit they are not the same morality.

Seer TT: "The correct answer is that the sociopath actually DO have the right (or Truth-based) legitimate view, and society has the illegitimate lie-based view. "

What's that? That senselessly killing people is wrong?
It is not anything to do with the action of the sociopath per se. It is the way his mind works. Now, he is not quite the same as a pure animal. BUT he is more of an animal than a highly socialised law-abiding citizen-slave will ever be. The distortion is caused by society.

Without society we would not be where we are now.
That is precisely why I make the above statement. Of course from My side of the fence, you cannot expect Me to answer any differently, as I would not expect you to.

(Rest became irrelevant)

I want humanity to become an animal again because animals are morally (not the human verion) Superior and have better and more reliable brain function.

ANY form of human society is sick, lie-based and toxic, whether it be ancient INCAN tribes or whatever. If it was before deseased human socities formed, then the human race deserves to die if that is evolution's way.

That does NOT mean it currently does NOT deserve to die, because humanity by-passed, at least partialy, evolution.
What a shame it did not.... and save the Tigers from us. Tigers are Superior to humans, and they are My Superiors just as much as earthworms are.

Copy your last response and paste it into a new thread.

i just checked out both links.. very interesting..!! the bible is just as open to fault as is any other book written by men, translated by men, designed by men. men are not without fault.. and neither are their books.. that christians claim to be the only people capable of understanding this bible is hilarious.. it should worry them that so many people are walking away from the religion.. it just doesnt hold up to careful scrutiny.. and when u remove the fear of "hell".. they might become aware of this fact. what of reason and logic? evidence?.. aside from "the bible said so.. so god said so".. i know they feel they are above the rest of humanity.. they are after all "the new chosen".. which entitles them to feel special.. and gives them the ability to know things they claim only god knows.. even after walking away from the christian religion.. i cant seem to get away!! lol.. hmmm.. the religious residue doesnt come off with soap and water.