are any of you honest enough to simply answer the question asked?

[Anomalocaris]

Want an honest answer? Ask an honest question.

Better yet, don’t complain when the answers you get aren’t the ones you want.

Why would a Christian ask a question that is both leading and backhanded if he intends to abide by an answer he didn’t want?

He wouldn’t be Christian, much less drich, if conducts himself in good faith, so to speak, when he is in the midst of his delusion that his faith somehow gives him an advantage over his interlocutors.

For drich, the time for being in that state of delusion would be all the time.

[Yonadav]

Drich is correct about you people not answering the question. It was a little weird, because you didn't have to give up any tactical ground by answering the question. Valk answered the question, and gave up no ground on their position on abortion. I tend to stay out of abortion discussions because it is just about impossible to have an intellectually honest discussion about the issue. For example, 'a woman's right to choose' has nothing to do with the legal reasoning behind a doctor's right to perform abortions. I am 'Pro doctor's right to perform the procedure when they determine that it is in the best medical interest of their patient', because that is the legal basis on which abortion rests.

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm not sure what would give you that impression..or why anyone in their right mind would carry water for Drich, lol.

Drich was wondering whether or not we would be okay with "mid birth abortions" of the type the bill would allow.  Since those "mid birth abortions" the bill is referring to are exclusively an issue of life threatening circumstance or deformity that would lead a physician to certify the procedure........it's been a no brainer for every single person who has answered his stupid fucking question.

"What if baby is black, hurr durr?"

-Not a deformity, not life threatening. Find me a "physician" who would "certify" it as such and I'll show you a nutball with a coathanger.

All of which has been addressed, in both threads. A womans right to choose covers a wide range of decisions, not just the decision to abort, but the decision to proceed with a life threatening delivery, or the delivery of a severely deformed child. I am entirely uninterested in either the state or the physician present possessing the ability to make a unilateral decision for the woman in question. As previously indicated, and also covered under a woman's right to choose...I'm entirely okay with purely elective abortions for any reason whatsoever...including "baby will be black, hurr durr". I don't have to be okay with her choice or the reasoning behind her choice, it's not my choice. That would be some next level racist shit..but it's still her racist uterus. Hey..what if she really wants a blue eyed baby...and the results of predictive analysis tell her that the child is likely to end up with green eyes?

Bye bye baby, still not my choice.

There is only one alternative to choice. Strapping a woman to a gurney for the duration of her pregnancy and then forcing birth. Anti abortion laws have never prevented a woman from having an abortion, ever. They only get women killed seeking them. This is an indisputable historical fact. It is the -reason- that we ended our short experiment with forced birthism. All of these assholes can settle their own accounts with jesus privately. If they don't want to have abortions, then the solution is simple..and it's a choice..no less, that they can make (unless we decide that they don't have a right to those choices....lol)......

Don't have an abortion.

[Yonadav]

I'm not carrying water for Drich any more than the one person who answered his question was. That's what is weird about this. No tactical ground would have been lost by simply answering the question. I'm sure that within your echo chambers there is so much winning. But when viewed from outside of the echo chamber, you guys have simply given Drich proof of intellectual dishonesty.

[Anomalocaris]

I'm not carrying water for Drich any more than the one person who answered his question was. That's what is weird about this. No tactical ground would have been lost by simply answering the question. I'm sure that within your echo chambers there is so much winning. But when viewed from outside of the echo chamber, you guys have simply given Drich proof of intellectual dishonesty.

If you are not familiar with the lengthy context of drich’s reputation in the forum, then be humble, shut up, and observe.    You need not descend from what you conceived to be on high and condescend to grace us with your opinionated arbition.

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm not carrying water for Drich any more than the one person who answered his question was. That's what is weird about this. No tactical ground would have been lost by simply answering the question. I'm sure that within your echo chambers there is so much winning. But when viewed from outside of the echo chamber, you guys have simply given Drich proof of intellectual dishonesty.

The question was answered, by multiple people, in two threads.  The threads exist, anyone can read them....you've gone from carrying water for drich, to lying like a common drich.

I'm so sick of this shit on the boards...it's been grinding away at me for years, lol. We've tried so many things to foster better discussions..but the problem has never been the "tone"..or potty mouths..it's been the simple fact that no matter what discussion we try to have there will always be someone who needs to insist that the text in front of everyone's face doesn't exist.

Fucking ludicrous.....

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Yo, Bich, I'm glad you're learning to live with constant failure.

[Drich]

It's the woman's baby and body. Not yours. She gets to decide, whether you like it or not. Your Stone Age "morality" colors your thinking. What she does is none of your business.

Fail... again this op is about answering questions asked, I specifically said this is not a rehash of the abortion issue. i asked over and over why you all can not answer a question asked.

[Mister Agenda]

I just started a thread and asked a point blank question then backed it with a news story..

one of you answered the question asked. the rest re made the question into something they feel comfortable asking.

what is with you guys that makes you so afraid to vary from the main stream answer, or in this case answer a question the main stream has not addressed yet? do you fear your peers say something bad about you if you defend a healthy 9mo old being born?

Again my question centers around a fully developed baby who can on it's own live outside the womb without any machines or mechanical assistance. who is to be literally ripped apart inutero and pulled out one piece at a time. and I get fetus remarks from a dead comic or I get a read back of 1/2 the bill where it is about the woman's health and not mental or emotional well being as the bill stated. Again not looking to discuss the bill here but the process in which you guys never answer the question I ask, but rather change the parameters of my question to some old hat well worn 1970's abortion argument bullshit you don't even have to type out any more because your key board is so use to those key strokes all you have to do is tap the computer a few times and out comes the same old speech that has nothing to do with the topic presented.

Could you imagine if the christians side of the web site only spoke to you by rewording your questions? we'd be bann for not following topic or some sort of trolling as we would be provoking a different argument and intentionally derailing the thread. which is what you all are doing now to me!

Your question was so malformed that it should not have been taken to full term. The more you over-complicate the question, the harder it is to give a simple answer.

I would never behave on a Christian forum the way you do here, Drich, but most people wouldn't behave on any forum the way you do here. You've earned every drop of scorn and ounce of distrust you get. You seem to think showing your ass will get you a million dollars someday, but all it gets you is a reputation as a self-righteous asshole. Your main value on this forum is to the less scrupulous anti-theists who can make you out to be what typical Christians are like, trolls for Jesus.

[Drich]

Hey, great, a new thread where you kick it off with the same lie that made you abandon the last thread.

No drich, you didn't back anything up with a news article.  You lied about a bill, lied about a news article, and are now lying about your last thread.

Guess what, nothings changed in the five minutes between threads.  I'm still all in for a womans right to choose, for the same reasons.

again I asked 3 questions why can you douche bags simply answer the questions asked? i have never not answered directly every single question pointblank asked even if you did not understand or like the answer.

I asked three question seeking your judgement on how far into the pregnancy is it ok for you to to sanction an abortion.
Answer that in the other thread.

Here i ask for why you all always change the subject some how so as to always avoid topics that may have your peers turn on you.I also asked for a projection of the site reaction if all christians answered questions like you do. "we'd" be bann for trolling the topic off subject, so why then are none of you receivig warnings for doing the same?