Milo Yiannopoulos resigns from Breitbart News

[Thumpalumpacus]

Dude. You compared abortion with cutting off a wiener. How do you expect anyone to respond to that? 

Actually, I didn't. I compared it to male sterilization. Do you even English, bro?

As for your arguments regarding bodily autonomy - Do you or do you not believe in the bodily autonomy of a baby?

Of a baby? Sure.

Of a fetus which is alive inside, and only because of, another human's body? No.

A fetus doesn't have rights. It should be obvious, even to someone as dull-witted as you, that a fetus does not have autonomy.

Quit equivocating "fetus" and "baby", and explain the contradiction I've pointed out. Your dodging is obvious, and will not be accepted.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

Dude. You compared abortion with cutting off a wiener. How do you expect anyone to respond to that? 

Actually, I didn't. I compared it to male sterilization. Do you even English, bro?

As for your arguments regarding bodily autonomy - Do you or do you not believe in the bodily autonomy of a baby?

Of a baby?  Sure.

Of a fetus which is alive inside, and only because of, another human's body? No.

A fetus doesn't have rights. It should be obvious, even to someone as dull-witted as you, that a fetus does not have autonomy.

Quit equivocating "fetus" and "baby", and explain the contradiction I've pointed out  Your dodging is obvious, and will not be accepted.

Would you assent to your government cutting off your balls because your nation's birthrate is sky-high?

The baby and the mother both have bodily autonomy. So how can you ignore the body autonomy of the baby and only care for the body autonomy of the woman?

[Thumpalumpacus]

The baby and the mother both have bodily autonomy. So how can you ignore the body autonomy of the baby and only care for the body autonomy of the woman?

Exactly how is the fetus autonomous? Mentally, can it make its own medical decisions? Physically, can it go where it wants, eat as it wishes, and so on?

No, it can do none of these things. Your assertion that an unborn fetus has the right to bodily autonomy is silly.

Of course, you won't admit that, because you would then have to admit you give preference of treatment to an undeveloped fetus over a living breathing adult, solely because she's a woman.

Tell us again how you're not misogynistic?

[Amarok]

The baby and the mother both have bodily autonomy. So how can you ignore the body autonomy of the baby and only care for the body autonomy of the woman?

Exactly how is the fetus autonomous? Mentally, can it make its own medical decisions? Physically, can it go where it wants, eat as it wishes, and so on?

No, it can do none of these things. Your assertion that an unborn fetus has the right to bodily autonomy is silly.

Of course, you won't admit that, because you would then have to admit you give preference of treatment to an undeveloped fetus over a living breathing adult, solely because she's a woman.

Tell us again how you're not misogynistic?

Not to mention the fact this has nothing to do with a desire to remove it's bodily rights. No one has that desire .Only that it has no right to her body. Outside her it has all the same rights . Inside her body she is allowed to kick it out. If it results in death that's sad but not worth violating her body over.

[The Industrial Atheist]

Almost all US abortions are performed before 20 weeks. At that time the fetus can't feel pain.

Sent from my LGL52VL using Tapatalk

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

Exactly how is the fetus autonomous? Mentally, can it make its own medical decisions? Physically, can it go where it wants, eat as it wishes, and so on?

lol you seem to think that if you substitute the word baby with fetus you can suddenly remove everything human about it. Fetus is just another word for a baby, more like a "little underdeveloped baby" it is still a baby, just not there yet completely.

So according to you if a human cannot make any medical decisions or physically move about or eat food then they do not deserve bodily autonomy? What about people that are in a coma or disabled people...?

Tell us again how you're not misogynistic?

Liberals never learn.

---

Almost all US abortions are performed before 20 weeks. At that time the fetus can't feel pain.

It's okay as long as it doesn't feel pain? Hmmm. Do you apply the same standard to other people also?

---

Not to mention the fact this has nothing to do with a desire to remove it's bodily rights.

Of course it does. You're intentionally putting it in a situation where it will inevitably die. You don't just get to go Ooops when you were well aware of what you were doing.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Exactly how is the fetus autonomous? Mentally, can it make its own medical decisions? Physically, can it go where it wants, eat as it wishes, and so on?

lol you seem to think that if you substitute the word baby with fetus you can suddenly remove everything human about it. Fetus is just another word for a baby, more like a "little underdeveloped baby" it is still a baby, just not there yet completely.

No, it's you doing the bait-and-switch. A fetus is not a baby. I'm not going to link you to the definitions. I will assume you're smart enough to use google. A fetus is not a baby, and that is you trying to be sly by equivocating them. This is exactly why I used the term "fetus". It is technically appropriate for our discussion.

So according to you if a human cannot make any medical decisions or physically move about or eat food then they do not deserve bodily autonomy? What about people that are in a coma or disabled people...?

See, this is where your youth is belied. There are things called powers-of-attorney and living wills which delegate that decision-making, signed by the patient ahead of time. These are legal documents which recognize the right of that person to assign medical decisions to someone else.

And all the same, you're ignoring the fact that those people aren't inhabiting the body of another human. Can you get any more disingenuous?

Liberals never learn.

I'm a registered Libertarian, you dolt. Go look it up and see how another assumption of yours collapses on the foundations of shoddy thinking.

I'm still waiting for a cogent explanation why you value the life of an undeveloped fetus over the life of an adult female. All I'm getting right now is you tap-dancing. Take off your shoes, sit down at a desk, look up some information on this topic, and get back to me when you can comment with a modicum of intelligence -- and honesty, which is painfully obvious in its absence from your posts.

Remember, your assignment is to explain why you value the life of an undeveloped fetus over the life of an adult female.

[Amarok]

It's not even really only about life. It's also about bodily sovereignty .There is no reason it's permitted to live inside her.Regardless of the circumstances that lead to it being there. And  she has the right to get it out of her body.

Oh and if Pool tries his emotional bs of. What if it was you? . I tell you this id rather my mother choose to have me of her own accord then was legally forced to do so . If it came with the possibility of death then so be it. But I'm fortunate my mother did choose to have me because she was given the choice. That makes me love her all the more.

[vorlon13]

It's unensouled regardless. Hard to imagine how a 'believer' could explain the heresy of insisting it is ensouled nevertheless to Jesus without the believer coming across as presuming to know more than Jesus as to how God set up the world.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

No, it's you doing the bait-and-switch. A fetus is not a baby.

A fetus is just an underdeveloped baby but yeah, if you're going to be strictly using definitions word by word then a fetus is not a baby. Who says bodily autonomy is limited only up to babies though? All human life deserve the right to have bodily autonomy and a human fetus is still human. There you go. Try digging your way out of that.

See, this is where your youth is belied. There are things called powers-of-attorney and living wills which delegate that decision-making, signed by the patient ahead of time. These are legal documents which recognize the right of that person to assign medical decisions to someone else.

What is your argument here? Is it: This is the correct way because it is the legal way? Stop bringing law into this because law is not some absolute morality we're arguing about the moral side of abortion I already know it is legal.

And all the same, you're ignoring the fact that those people aren't inhabiting the body of another human. Can you get any more disingenuous?

Inhabiting the body of another human with their own consent. Unless you're talking about extreme situations like rape to prove your point, although I do support abortion if rape was involved because the woman didn't consent to have a baby inside of her so then your argument holds up, because a human life(the baby) is overtaking the womb of another human without consent.

I'm still waiting for a cogent explanation why you value the life of an undeveloped fetus over the life of an adult female.

Life of the mother in danger? I'm all for abortion. Got raped? You have my compassion and I'm not at all against abortion. You made a whoopsie? Get the fuck out of here.