• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Planned Parenthood sued

It's perfectly relevant to the question asked.
It still is not. Your claim, the result of an inability to address the real issue will not change reality.

You jumped into a discussion between me and Sangha, where Sangha made the unsupported claim that life in the womb isn't equal to life out of the womb.
So you expected him to prove a negative. It just shows the level of reasoning you are bringing to this.

Yes, it is the issue.
See above.
 
It still is not. Your claim, the result of an inability to address the real issue will not change reality.

It still is a reasonable response. You asked the difference between an infant and a grown person and I provided you the differences. If you think they aren't appropriate then address my evidence and why you think it is wrong. When you dismiss it without a valid argument or any evidence that you even read the evidence provided it appears like you are just running away from the argument. Which I guess you are.

So you expected him to prove a negative. It just shows the level of reasoning you are bringing to this.

LOL, no. You have mistaken philosophical debate with scientific discovery. :roll: In a philosophical or moral debate you have to make a supporting argument for your stance either way.

See above.

See above. :roll:
 
It still is a reasonable response.
No it still was not. Development is not the issue nor is it relevant. The differences are the issue and they are factual.

You asked the difference between an infant and a grown person and I provided you the differences.
Not in a relevant context. Biologically, as it relates to "living" there are no differences, but there is a wast difference between a single cell and a born human.
 
No it still was not. Development is not the issue nor is it relevant. The differences are the issue and they are factual.

You asked the question, Prometeus. It's entirely dishonest of you to ask what the biological differences are between an infant and an adult and, when presented with a list of biological differences, claim the list isn't a reasonable response to your request.

Not in a relevant context. Biologically, as it relates to "living" there are no differences[/quote]

False. You don't seem to understand the meaning of any of the words you are using.

but there is a wast difference between a single cell and a born human.

You have yet to make an argument either way. You are simply stuck in a superficial judgments between the stages of human life.
 
Show me proof that being gay is not a choice. All of I have seen from your side is just a bunch of booting popping and jukes and jives. Nothing concrete.

I'll be waiting...

show me proof that being a raging homophobe is not a choice
 
Gov, if you just say that being gay is very natural, that is fine. But wouldn't it be more effective if you explain to us WHY you think that you are right and we are wrong?

really you need a gay person to explain this to you? Are you really that dense?
 
Choosing to be gay indicates a perverse nature. It is a sign of a sickness and disease.

Is being gay hurtful? Absolutely. It is more destructive than global warming or cancer. Imagine if the gays took over. Our society would crumble. It would be impossible for them to sustain the population or properly raise a family.
It is factual that choosing to post ignorant uneducated drivel is an indication of primitive thinking and self imposed obliviousness. Further more, moronic assertions never supported by any evidence only confirms the sorely lacking knowledge. Why you choose this line of posting, well...
 
really you need a gay person to explain this to you? Are you really that dense?

No. I'm not that dense, and I wonder why you would think so.
 
Hold on, in Aurora, Colorado those who were shot and were traumatized by the shootings sued the movie theater. Was that also bullcrap? This happened on Planned Parenthood's property. There have been a number of attacks over the years on abortion clinics. Should the clinic have provided security? If the clinic did provide security was it insufficient? Just because Planned Parenthood is a popular abortion mill doesn't mean that it shouldn't be responsible for what happens on its property, like any other organization.

Apparently, yes it was bullcrap

Cinemark Wants Losing Aurora Massacre Plaintiffs to Pay Legal Costs - Law Blog - WSJ
 
Yes it was. Complete BS.

Of course it was, Hopefully Aurora is a predictor for what will happen with this lawsuit.

Because this one is just plain silly.
 
Back
Top Bottom