(March 1, 2017 at 4:02 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(March 1, 2017 at 12:13 pm)alpha male Wrote: By your definition, neither is autonomous. Try again.

You realize the autonomy we're talking about is bodily, right?

---

(March 1, 2017 at 11:53 am)Aegon Wrote: But if life begins at conception, it is not a potential life, it already is a human life, with the potential to grow and develop its capacities.

If life begins at conception.

What is the zygote experiencing that makes its experience of life equal to that of the woman carrying it?

Well that's my point. The zygote and woman are both human beings, but that doesn't mean that they are equal.

It seems to me that what you basically have is a life that's forming within a woman's stomach.

The question is at what point the fetus becomes alive and how comfortable someone is with killing/extinguishing this life/potential life.

I've been reading pro choice and anti abortion arguments and aparently even the presence of a brain doesn't guarantee the fetus is consious and alive.

On the other hand you have to think that at some stage before the birth the baby is what you'd class as being alive and not necesserily just potential life.

I can see why it's an interesting topic to some people but not really to me.  I did find out that a fetus isn't necesserily considered alive, so I've learned something new there.  I'll remember that for the next time I get into an argument with my friends about fetuses.

Thumpalumpacus Wrote:No one here is arguing for unregulated abortions.

Then you should stop with your "Hurr durr Wimminz bodiez u dnt gt 2 say anytin!!" kind of arguments, a baby is not the property of a mother, once it is conceived it is it's own person and deserves the right like every other human to grow up and make decisions by itself on whether it want to live or die or whatever.

paulpablo Wrote:I did find out that a fetus isn't necesserily considered alive

Both pro-life and pro-choice are extremists. It's weird because I only see this kind of thing in America, there is no happy medium, either you're at the one extreme or the other. Obviously if you twist up some definitions and play some word games you cannot consider a fetus as necessarily as "alive", you can't consider it as "dead" either(One could do the same thing and consider it as "human" and hence deserving of the most "humane" thing to be done to it). It's in the process of becoming "alive", not technically alive but still the closest to it. The problem is people have a hard time defining alive but death is pretty easy. Imo, if you had to define "alive" you'd have to look at whether there is a heart beat or not if you have to go strictly by the definitions and such.

And again pool shows he doesn't understand nuance

And no he doesn't have to abandon the Body argument because nothing he said contradicts it

Pool, until you have answered my question, you will not get anything else but mockery. You're clearly afraid of my question, dodging it as you have for pages, and to be honest, my contempt for you is growing due to your obvious dodging.

(March 1, 2017 at 10:53 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Pool, until you have answered my question, you will not get anything else but mockery. You're clearly afraid of my question, dodging it as you have for pages, and to be honest, my contempt for you is growing due to your obvious dodging.

Well of course he's going to dodge because he can't answer the question. All he can do is try and shift it to an attack on position you never argued for. (he does that a lot) And try and challenge on contradiction that exists on ignorance and no were else (the idea a woman's body can be respected and abortion can be regulated without one violating the other)

(March 1, 2017 at 10:53 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Pool, until you have answered my question, you will not get anything else but mockery. You're clearly afraid of my question, dodging it as you have for pages, and to be honest, my contempt for you is growing due to your obvious dodging.

Would've been nice if you just said what your question is. I'd be more than happy to answer it and no, I'm not going to dig back through the previous pages searching for this mysterious question of yours. 


It's not like you were entirely honest in our discussions either, you didn't answer my two questions: 

1) Do all humans deserve bodily autonomy?
2) Is a human fetus human? 

precisely because you knew it would prove your position wrong so you made bizarre rationalizations to somehow deflect it. Meh, idc though, if you want an answer just ask.

I've asked this question four times now. If you're too lazy, or stupid, to find it, then you'll have to live with the optics of being someone who is unwilling to hold an honest discussion. I have answered your questions, in my post #163. If you're having trouble understanding simple English, or too busy jerking off to read a reply, say as much. I'm not going to answer the same questions twice when you refuse to do me the courtesy even once, Pigeon.

My only goal for the last two or three pages has been to demonstrate your dishonesty by eliciting it from you. Thanks for your cooperation.

(March 2, 2017 at 12:41 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: I've asked this question four times now. If you're too lazy, or stupid, to find it, then you'll have to live with the optics of being someone who is unwilling to hold an honest discussion. I have answered your questions, in my post #163. If you're having trouble understanding simple English, or too busy jerking off to read a reply, say as much. I'm not going to answer the same questions twice when you refuse to do me the courtesy even once, Pigeon.

My only goal for the last two or three pages has been to demonstrate your dishonesty by eliciting it from you. Thanks for your cooperation.

The mysterious "question" that has defeated pool. He feels so helpless. He can't give any answer to the pure genius question of Thump. He is now hiding, feeling disgusted and ashamed at how wrong he was. The camera zooms in, someone is opening the door. It's Thump, he is wearing his suit he won after he humiliated pool by showcasing the sheer incompetence and disingenuousness clearly evident from pools inability to answer the million dollar genius super duper question of Thump. Curtain falls, Thump is celebrating his victory; throwing the chess pieces in the air, pool is walking away from the crowd; his head low but from the slight touch of some light there was a smirk in his face. Thump had not won anything. Pool keeps walking, thump is still celebrating his "victory". The curtain falls as Thump dances to the audience like a monkey celebrating his victory .
 

(March 1, 2017 at 10:28 pm)pool the matey Wrote: Then you should stop with your "Hurr durr Wimminz bodiez u dnt gt 2 say anytin!!" kind of arguments, a baby is not the property of a mother, once it is conceived it is it's own person and deserves the right like every other human to grow up and make decisions by itself on whether it want to live or die or whatever.

Unless the fetus' father is a rapist? If a fetus is "its own person" somehow - then so is one, that's a result of a rape - that clump of cells is no different, than the "regular" pregnancy. Yet you are happy to deny those "babies" ( ) the right to "grow up and make decisions by itself on whether it want to live or die or whatever". What did those fetuses do to you, or anybody? Can we also kill actual newborn babies, if they were fathered by rapists? No? Why not? According to you - they are no different from a few-weeks-old fetus.