Abortion not allowed

[Esquilax]

Even if that were true, so what? Chas called you out on your claim that we haven't presented any facts to support our side.

Sorry where were the facts that Chas presented along with their source.

So you're going the standard christian theist route of expecting rigorous academic sourcing from everyone else, while simultaneously considering your bald, fiat statements of opinion to require no factual backup at all?

[C4RM5]

Yea actually I would prefer it if you responded with nuh uh because it is better than swearing at me and calling me a monster, but to be honest no one has provide factual information all you are doing is questioning me.

I didn't swear at you or call you a monster, so I'm sort of at a loss why you would point that out to me in place of acknowledging or responding to the things I did tell you. You're remarkably evasive, given how strongly you seem to hold to your position.

As to factual information, to start with you're the one presenting this position that abortion is murder, so you have the burden of proof for establishing that, a burden that you've been fleeing from at top speed ever since page one. Just because we won't take your random, repeated claim as true on face value doesn't mean we need to refute it; you need to demonstrate it.

As it happens though, many of us have tried to refute it, and it's a trivially easy position to refute. A fetus has no nervous system or brain, they aren't alive in any sense that one could kill it as we understand the term, and this has been pointed out to you. You response is that a fetus becomes a living person later, and so therefore it is now, which is not only totally nonsensical (lots of things can become other things later, does that make them all the things they could potentially come right now? ) but also inconsistently enforced. If a fetus is a person because it becomes a person later, then why isn't a sperm also a person? Why isn't a person multiple people because later on they'll produce sperm which becomes another person? Both of those things fit what your definition, and yet I doubt you're clamoring to call masturbation genocide, right?

And if not, what is your justification for stopping this "it'll be a person later, therefore it is a person now!" line of reasoning at the zygote, but not the sperm or the father in potentia?

See, Carm? That is an argument. I didn't just say "I don't believe it is murder" and stop there, now did I?

I know that rapes lead to pregnancy but only 5% of them do.

I know a person who became pregnant via rape, and I must say that I find your glib, reductive attitude towards them immensely distasteful and offensive. It's disgusting.

You are one of the very small group of people that hasn't sworn at me , thatnk you. Secondly I don't count a sperm as a human because it doesn't form one without reaching the egg, secondly I don't think masturbation is genocide because they haven't reached the egg to form a human.

Finally I know when someone has been raped and becomes pregnant but preventing someone from living is still not right.

[Chas]

Even if that were true, so what? Chas called you out on your claim that we haven't presented any facts to support our side.

Sorry where were the facts that Chas presented along with their source.

I just told you the facts I (and others) presented - the basic facts about embryology and development.

Do you even Google?

[C4RM5]

Sorry where were the facts that Chas presented along with their source.

So you're going the standard christian theist route of expecting rigorous academic sourcing from everyone else, while simultaneously considering your bald, fiat statements of opinion to require no factual backup at all?

I have provided factual information about rape and pregnancy, but I was just saying that Chas didn't say any facts as you claimed he did.

[Bad Wolf]

Finally I know when someone has been raped and becomes pregnant but preventing someone from living is still not right.

Define someone. Give us something to work with here, give us a bloody definition.

[C4RM5]

Sorry where were the facts that Chas presented along with their source.

I just told you the facts I (and others) presented - the basic facts about embryology and development.

Do you even Google?

No , I don't use Google I use Bing

---

Finally I know when someone has been raped and becomes pregnant but preventing someone from living is still not right.

Define someone. Give us something to work with here, give us a bloody definition.

I have given so many definations of what a human is stop asking for them.

[Bad Wolf]

I have provided factual information about rape and pregnancy, but I was just saying that Chas didn't say any facts as you claimed he did.

What facts? Must have missed those. All you've come out with is the same assertion over and over that foetuses are people. You have provided no facts, just your opinion.

We on the other hand have provided facts, do you remember all that stuff about no nervous system and no brain? Well, those are facts that happen to be true, facts that we have told you about and you have just ignored.

[C4RM5]

Sorry where were the facts that Chas presented along with their source.

I'm sorry, what? We were talking about facts throughout the entire thread, not in one post.

And this is just great! You want sources?!? The facts that have been stated are basic biology which can be found in any text book. This stuff is proven, go and do your own bloody research before you get into a topic of which you know nothing about.

I know information about abortion but I also know what my beliefs are, the two contradict

[Esquilax]

You are one of the very small group of people that hasn't sworn at me , thatnk you. Secondly I don't count a sperm as a human because it doesn't form one without reaching the egg, secondly I don't think masturbation is genocide because they haven't reached the egg to form a human.

By that logic, a fetus doesn't become a human without a womb in which to gestate, which it doesn't have if it's aborted, meaning your entire argument chain falls apart. There's no definite certainty that any given fetus will survive, so doesn't that mean that only those fetuses which survive count as "becoming human," and therefore the aborted ones fail at the outset?

And that's just me assuming that you aren't taking the worse possible argument that I could derive from that statement, which is that the sperm and the egg "form a human," meaning you're just asserting that a fertilized egg is automatically a human... in which case you're right, but arguing on the wrong terms. Humanity isn't the issue; personhood is. A human being without a brain or nervous system, as with a fetus, has a term applied to it, and that term is dead.

Finally I know when someone has been raped and becomes pregnant but preventing someone from living is still not right.

So your position as regards victims of rape is basically "they're shit out of luck."? And you consider that a morally tenable position to take over a lump of cells with no brain, no mind, and no guarantee of life?

I know information about abortion but I also know what my beliefs are, the two contradict

And for some reason you think that, when the facts contradict your belief, that the facts must be wrong? That reality itself must be wrong?

[C4RM5]

I have provided factual information about rape and pregnancy, but I was just saying that Chas didn't say any facts as you claimed he did.

What facts? Must have missed those. All you've come out with is the same assertion over and over that foetuses are people. You have provided no facts, just your opinion.

We on the other hand have provided facts, do you remember all that stuff about no nervous system and no brain? Well, those are facts that happen to be true, facts that we have told you about and you have just ignored.

Towards the start of the deabte I said that only 5% of rapes lead to pregnancy and I gave a link to a website that had the facts.