When Does Life Begin?

baddog, Look up "non sequitur" in your dictionary.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

real life wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
real wrote: But it's still an attempt to chose between two wrong answers, and more importantly, it's not a scenario that has any real relationship to the actual everyday issue that the abortion question presents.

Real can recognize "any real relationship to actual everyday issue," but refuses to acknowledge that it doesn't affect him personally in any way when a woman he doesn't even know has an abortion, but wants to impose his religious' belief anyway.

Child molestation doesn't affect me in any way, since I'm not a child.

Does that mean it shouldn't be illegal, or that adults shouldn't care if it is legal?

You're striking out , CI (even though you're shouting big blue words at me). Maybe you should try logic instead.

Most people will understand why it wasn't necessary to answer real's question; there's no relationship between the prolifer's intrusion into a complete stranger's personal choice on abortion against "child molestation." Roe vs Wade allows a woman the right to an abortion; there are no laws that allows child molestation. DUH!

You are making biased assumptions that, logically cannot be true. You assume that everybody thinks the same as you and do not require an answer that was put forth. Your refusal to answer says more about you than it does the subject.

You are putting forth your opinions and assuming that others are of the same opinion. I am not of the same opinion as you and I do not agree with you.

DUH!

0 Replies

It's not necessary for everyone to believe as I do, because the laws of our land. DUH!~

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

baddog, Look up "non sequitur" in your dictionary.

He will find that it has no bearing on what he wrote.

Are you taking lessons from Chumly?

Razz

0 Replies

baddog1 wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
No, spendi, you're not even paraphrasing correctly. Show me thread name, date of post, and the question I didn't answer?

Here's just a few of many ci - and all with the member real life. No doubt you and/or someone else will make an off-color remark about RL, however the fact remains that there are many questions you do not answer.

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2393119#2393119

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2520539#2520539

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2565769#2565769

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2565771#2565771

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2566397#2566397

Many of these questions that RL asked are questions that CI has answered. The first is the line of questioning about crimes that do not effect the individual, and whether or not the individual has a responcibility to support a law banning things like child molestation etc. I was not aware that this question remained unanswered. The rest deal with the issue of moral relativity. I am positive that CI has left no room for ambiguity on this topic. He has his beliefs, and he isn't trying to encourage or stop a woman from having an abortion. He has stated clearly that he believes it is not his place to judge.

CI's position on this is easy to understand. It's not anyone's bussiness but the woman's to choose. Even if CI wanted to, there's no way he could force his beliefs on another. I'll illustrate...

He believes it is a woman's choice.

if he meets a woman, and she believes it is her choice, all is well.

if he meets a woman, and she DOES NOT believe that it is her choice, nothing changes. It wouldn't matter what he said, even if he convinced her it was her choice, she'd still be the one to choose not him.

Both women proceed accordingly to their beliefs not CI's.

T
K
O

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

It's not necessary for everyone to believe as I do, because the laws of our land. DUH!~

Is it a good thing our laws of the land are not written in stone in your humble opinion?

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

baddog1 wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
No, spendi, you're not even paraphrasing correctly. Show me thread name, date of post, and the question I didn't answer?

Here's just a few of many ci - and all with the member real life. No doubt you and/or someone else will make an off-color remark about RL, however the fact remains that there are many questions you do not answer.

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2393119#2393119

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2520539#2520539

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2565769#2565769

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2565771#2565771

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2566397#2566397

Many of these questions that RL asked are questions that CI has answered. The first is the line of questioning about crimes that do not effect the individual, and whether or not the individual has a responcibility to support a law banning things like child molestation etc. I was not aware that this question remained unanswered. The rest deal with the issue of moral relativity. I am positive that CI has left no room for ambiguity on this topic. He has his beliefs, and he isn't trying to encourage or stop a woman from having an abortion. He has stated clearly that he believes it is not his place to judge.

CI's position on this is easy to understand. It's not anyone's bussiness but the woman's to choose. Even if CI wanted to, there's no way he could force his beliefs on another. I'll illustrate...

He believes it is a woman's choice.

if he meets a woman, and she believes it is her choice, all is well.

if he meets a woman, and she DOES NOT believe that it is her choice, nothing changes. It wouldn't matter what he said, even if he convinced her it was her choice, she'd still be the one to choose not him.

Both women proceed accordingly to their beliefs not CI's.

T
K
O

Anything wrong with trying to talk someone out of it? How about talking someone into it? I only ask because some woman are'nt sure what to do.

Just as I'm not sure about stuff. I'm sure you can relate.

Telling a woman she carries an unborn, not completely formed human being is to speak the truth and allows her to make a decision based on truth whereas, telling a woman it is nothing more than a parasite, a clump of flesh, or anything of such nature is based upon either falsity, or ignorance and should be greatly discouraged.

Do you agree?

Is telling a woman what she carries an invasion on her choice? Be careful here for many here (and planned parenthood) have done so.

0 Replies

I wouldn't blame you if you wanted to talk a woman out of getting an abortion, but once she has made a choice, I'd expect you to accept it.

Telling a woman that an abortion can cause breast cancer is a lie, so much to the degree that no matter what another person views the unborn as, it pails in comparisson.

I don't mind telling the person that what is inside her is a form of human life. I don't think it makes a difference, unless the individual thinks that something else is inside. Yes, many women are unsure about what to do, but what they are unsure about is rarely what is inside them but if they are in a good position to raise what comes out or even if they are in a position to give birth concidering what effect it will have on their life.

Plenty of people are unsure, that doesn't mean that they are looking for you help in the form of an answer.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

Is it a good thing our laws of the land are not written in stone in your humble opinion?

1) You have in no way justified that an absolutist perspective of good / bad can be applied to a modern body of law.

2) For that matter you have not even defined good / bad!

Unless you can logically rationalize 1) and 2) you're dead in the water.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

baddog, Look up "non sequitur" in your dictionary.

And?

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

baddog1 wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
No, spendi, you're not even paraphrasing correctly. Show me thread name, date of post, and the question I didn't answer?

Here's just a few of many ci - and all with the member real life. No doubt you and/or someone else will make an off-color remark about RL, however the fact remains that there are many questions you do not answer.

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2393119#2393119

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2520539#2520539

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2565769#2565769

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2565771#2565771

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2566397#2566397

Many of these questions that RL asked are questions that CI has answered. The first is the line of questioning about crimes that do not effect the individual, and whether or not the individual has a responcibility to support a law banning things like child molestation etc. I was not aware that this question remained unanswered. The rest deal with the issue of moral relativity. I am positive that CI has left no room for ambiguity on this topic. He has his beliefs, and he isn't trying to encourage or stop a woman from having an abortion. He has stated clearly that he believes it is not his place to judge.

CI's position on this is easy to understand. It's not anyone's bussiness but the woman's to choose. Even if CI wanted to, there's no way he could force his beliefs on another. I'll illustrate...

He believes it is a woman's choice.

if he meets a woman, and she believes it is her choice, all is well.

if he meets a woman, and she DOES NOT believe that it is her choice, nothing changes. It wouldn't matter what he said, even if he convinced her it was her choice, she'd still be the one to choose not him.

Both women proceed accordingly to their beliefs not CI's.

T
K
O

Deist: ci's assertion on this matter was w/o caveat. And by not directly answering RL and others - clearly ci is leaving himself an 'out' despite his supposed "beliefs".

Also; do you find it interesting - that you're describing the same ci who staunchly believes that everyone should stay out of the woman's business - is the same ci who admonishes members for not treating impoverished children and acting on that situation as he feels they (we) should?

[Oh, and BTW: ci CREATED this assertion about the impoverished children with absolutely no evidence? None! Essentially ci just decided that members were not doing as he felt they should!]

0 Replies

Quote:

spendius wrote:
c.i. wrote-

Quote:
Show me where I have not answered a direct question.

I think there might be one or two examples, maybe more--I lost count--on wande's astonishing thread.

spendi, You wax nonsense. Show me the beef?

Since c.i. wrote that I have asked him a few direct questions.

Here are two.

Sun. 12.47pm A2K time. How do you define employment?

Sun 9.42 am. To what extent did the 8 years of the Democrats "help everyone"?

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

I wouldn't blame you if you wanted to talk a woman out of getting an abortion, but once she has made a choice, I'd expect you to accept it.

Telling a woman that an abortion can cause breast cancer is a lie, so much to the degree that no matter what another person views the unborn as, it pails in comparisson.

I don't mind telling the person that what is inside her is a form of human life. I don't think it makes a difference, unless the individual thinks that something else is inside. Yes, many women are unsure about what to do, but what they are unsure about is rarely what is inside them but if they are in a good position to raise what comes out or even if they are in a position to give birth concidering what effect it will have on their life.

Plenty of people are unsure, that doesn't mean that they are looking for you help in the form of an answer.

T
K
O

I never even heard about the cancer thing.

If a woman goes to a clinic and inquires about what she is carrying, no one has any business referring to it as just a clump of cells or a ball of flesh. This just minimizes the importance of her decision for the sake of profit.

I'm sure you can agree.

It's the same thing being done on this thread and it's dishonest.

This choice is of grave importance since a human life is in the balance and should not be taken lightly or minimized to make it easier for a woman to abort.

This is why many are referred to as pro aborts and not just pro choice.

That's my point. I'll leave it at that.

We cannot agree on what a woman carries within her here. What makes you think women don't have doubts or questions as to what she carries?

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

real life wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
real wrote: But it's still an attempt to chose between two wrong answers, and more importantly, it's not a scenario that has any real relationship to the actual everyday issue that the abortion question presents.

Real can recognize "any real relationship to actual everyday issue," but refuses to acknowledge that it doesn't affect him personally in any way when a woman he doesn't even know has an abortion, but wants to impose his religious' belief anyway.

Child molestation doesn't affect me in any way, since I'm not a child.

Does that mean it shouldn't be illegal, or that adults shouldn't care if it is legal?

You're striking out , CI (even though you're shouting big blue words at me). Maybe you should try logic instead.

Most people will understand why it wasn't necessary to answer real's question; there's no relationship between the prolifer's intrusion into a complete stranger's personal choice on abortion against "child molestation." Roe vs Wade allows a woman the right to an abortion; there are no laws that allows child molestation. DUH!

So are you arguing that abortion SHOULD be legal simply because it IS legal?

0 Replies

take a look.

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/hughes/061018

"This is barbaric! There is no other word for it. Giving an abortion. The baby survives the abortion. Doctors and nurses do nothing to help it. Just leave it to die. But then, that's the point of the abortion, right? No baby."

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

take a look.

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/hughes/061018

"This is barbaric! There is no other word for it. Giving an abortion. The baby survives the abortion. Doctors and nurses do nothing to help it. Just leave it to die. But then, that's the point of the abortion, right? No baby."

Bart:

Acceptable collateral damage! Confused

Whatever discomfort these "products of conception" may go through as they die are of no comparison to the rights and convenience of the female carrier.

It is interesting that the host would desire to know the sex of the product. Why do you think that is?

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

Quote:
spendius wrote:
c.i. wrote-

Quote:
Show me where I have not answered a direct question.

I think there might be one or two examples, maybe more--I lost count--on wande's astonishing thread.

spendi, You wax nonsense. Show me the beef?

Since c.i. wrote that I have asked him a few direct questions.

Here are two.

Sun. 12.47pm A2K time. How do you define employment?

spendi, Do you own a dictionary? My definition is the same. This is a q?

Sun 9.42 am. To what extent did the 8 years of the Democrats "help everyone"?

According to the majority of studies on democratic and republican presidents, the concensus is that democrats win hands down on the majority of Americans improving their lives. This has been "common knowledge" for those who bother to do a web search, or read the newspaper.

0 Replies

That's not an answer. That's woffle.

0 Replies

I have often thought you have mastered the English language, but it's evident that you still lack comprehension skills.

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

I never even heard about the cancer thing.

Well now you have. Many pro-lifers rely on lies to convince women to not have abortions.

Bartikus wrote:

If a woman goes to a clinic and inquires about what she is carrying, no one has any business referring to it as just a clump of cells or a ball of flesh. This just minimizes the importance of her decision for the sake of profit.

You're not qualified to spaek on other's motives. That includes both the woman anad the doctor.

Bartikus wrote:

I'm sure you can agree.

I agree with little you have had to say, less the motives you express.

Bartikus wrote:

It's the same thing being done on this thread and it's dishonest.

Choices aren't being made on this thread, and if I were to try and convince you to think otherwise, my motive obviously ins't profit. You are incorrect, your comparisson is poor.

Bartikus wrote:

This choice is of grave importance since a human life is in the balance and should not be taken lightly or minimized to make it easier for a woman to abort.

So you think it's only important as long as someone believes as you do. hypocrite. what choice are you referring to? You don't believe the mother has the right to chose!

Bartikus wrote:

This is why many are referred to as pro aborts and not just pro choice.

I call BS.

Bartikus wrote:

That's my point. I'll leave it at that.

I doubt it.

Bartikus wrote:

We cannot agree on what a woman carries within her here. What makes you think women don't have doubts or questions as to what she carries?

It doesn't matter what you and I agree or disagree on, the woman's doubts rarely hinge on what is inside of her. For that matter, I've never disagreed on what is inside of a pregnant woman. I've only disagreed on what level of involvement the government should have, and I've disagreed on whether it is my place to judge. Waht we disagree on is irrelavant.

T
K
O

0 Replies

When Does Life Begin?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know