RE: Pro-life atheists
May 27, 2014 at 12:57 am
(This post was last modified: May 27, 2014 at 12:59 am by Chas.)
(May 27, 2014 at 12:52 am)Heywood Wrote:(May 27, 2014 at 12:47 am)Losty Wrote: Well....we are guilty of using the actual definition instead of making up our own, if that's what you mean.
A time will come when a human being can be conceived and develop all the way into adulthood without the need of a mother. The notion of viability outside the womb is arbitrary and becoming more and more meaningless.
Wrong. The fetus will still need to be hooked up to whatever that apparatus is until it is separately viable. It is exactly the same situation.
Quote:
(May 27, 2014 at 12:51 am)Losty Wrote: It's getting a little pathetic Heywood. Be a grown up, admit that you're being dishonest about the definition of viability, and go back to one of your other ridiculous arguments. I for one quite enjoyed the whole abortion is never necesarry to save a woman's life because I don't believe that argument.
You still haven't provided one case where a late term abortion was the only option. That lady you says knows of cases but can't tell us because of patient privacy is BS argument. She doesn't need to tell use who the patient is/was.....all she needs to do is say this specific condition cannot be treated except via a late term abortion.
Yes or no: Is a fertilized egg a human being?
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.