(May 27, 2014 at 3:35 pm)Heywood Wrote:(May 27, 2014 at 3:12 pm)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote: This is why talking to people who only know how to deal in absolutes is pointless.
Isn't it true, Heywood, that no matter what anyone else here states, you will steadfastly stick to your guns thus ensuring there is absolutely no point in further discussion?
I doubt very much that someone here could convince me that a zygote or embryo is not a human being....that would be like trying to convince me the earth doesn't revolve around the sun. Some facts are only disputed by the incredulous ones.
Now could someone convince me that humanity is better off because we allow abortions....that it is a net good for humanity? Maybe but I suppose a case could be made that humanity is better off that the Native Americans were slaughtered.
Could someone make the case that there is nothing immoral about killing another human being for matters of convenience(as in the case of the vast majority of abortions)...I doubt that too.
Not too long ago you said that 'science' agreed with your stance without citations.
I see now instead you've resorted to appeals to emotion over and above any sort of citation based argument. So really I rest my case.
(May 27, 2014 at 3:35 pm)Heywood Wrote: Last, I am pretty sure the pro-abortion folks are just as steadfast in their convictions as I am.
Well ok, let me take a leaf from your book.
'Science' actually tends to agree with the pro-choice lobby regarding when the line is drawn where a human becomes a human. It's always going to be a blurred line, but we can rule out stages such as the zygote.
But seeing as you pretty much agree with me that you're not here for a discussion, I see no reason to further engage with you on this subject.
Love atheistforums.org? Consider becoming a patreon and helping towards our server costs.