• 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!

Anti-choice propaganda about parenting

Why would she be motivated to make something of herself because of a pregnancy she aborted?

Because if nothing else, a series of bad choices nearly got her killed.
 
60 million and counting since R v W in '73. Sounds like genocide to me.

Don't believe everything that you believe. If there were 60 million abortions on a single day, it still wouldn't be considered as "genocide".

gen·o·cide

ˈjenəˌsīd

noun

the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation.

Note the word "People". That's plural of "Person". The yet to be born aren't persons.

eth·nic group

noun

a community or population made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent.
 
Homo Sapiens is a species...and zygote through its death...is still a homo sapien.

But a zygote IS NOT a human being.

If you admit that we do not change species mid-lifespan, and you admit that as sexually reproducing species our first stage of life is zygote... both of which are of course scientific facts... then claiming the unborn, which you recognize as living members of Homo sapiens, are somehow not human beings... then you are being ludicrous and self-contradictory.
 
Don't believe everything that you believe. If there were 60 million abortions on a single day, it still wouldn't be considered as "genocide".

gen·o·cide

ˈjenəˌsīd

noun

the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation.

Note the word "People". That's plural of "Person". The yet to be born aren't persons.

eth·nic group

noun

a community or population made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent.

By that standard, then the holocaust wasn't a genocide.
 
By that standard, then the holocaust wasn't a genocide.

Not true, you're wrong as usual. ****, now I know what the problem is, you're reading challenged.

Point out what part of my post that makes the holocaust not genocide.
 
If you admit that we do not change species mid-lifespan, and you admit that as sexually reproducing species our first stage of life is zygote... both of which are of course scientific facts... then claiming the unborn, which you recognize as living members of Homo sapiens, are somehow not human beings... then you are being ludicrous and self-contradictory.

So now, you make up your own scientific facts on species, etc.... and social definitions.

Give me contradictory evidence to what I said.
 
Not true, you're wrong as usual. ****, now I know what the problem is, you're reading challenged.

Point out what part of my post that makes the holocaust not genocide.

You just said it was the act of killing people.

The Nazis weren't killing people. They said so, and since "person" means nothing outside of the law...

I suppose to you "genocide" just becomes a matter of legitimate authority and order of operations when doing paperwork; as long as the law gets changed first, they're good to go.
 
So you're saying the **** was done with intent? So again, how does my point not stand?

Nobody is perfect. It seems to me that you set a really high standard for others is all.
 
You just said it was the act of killing people.

The Nazis weren't killing people. They said so, and since "person" means nothing outside of the law...

I suppose to you "genocide" just becomes a matter of legitimate authority and order of operations when doing paperwork; as long as the law gets changed first, they're good to go.

Clever, but no banana! Link please.... oh, a small authority in a small nation...wouldn't have come close to selling that to the rest of the world.
 
You just said it was the act of killing people.

The Nazis weren't killing people. They said so, and since "person" means nothing outside of the law...

I suppose to you "genocide" just becomes a matter of legitimate authority and order of operations when doing paperwork; as long as the law gets changed first, they're good to go.

BTW...Hitler's agenda was to purify the world of Jewish blood to include slavs. Also on his shortlist was mentally and physically handicapped, gypsies, criminals, homosexuals, blacks, communists, trade unionists, and many others. Those not slated for death were imprisoned and often worked to death.
 
BTW...Hitler's agenda was to purify the world of Jewish blood to include slavs. Also on his shortlist was mentally and physically handicapped, gypsies, criminals, homosexuals, blacks, communists, trade unionists, and many others. Those not slated for death were imprisoned and often worked to death.

Right.

And while I'm not certain he and his flunkies were thorough enough to ensure that they did everything by the book in all the other cases, with regards to Jews in particular - who make the lion's share of the victims - they were considered less than human by the state and denied legal personhood.


That's the thing you and yours just don't get; you want humans to be denied personhood so they can be killed on a whim - this is a common and ugly trend in history.
 
Last edited:
By this standard Nazis didn't discriminate when they threw those they denied personhood into concentration camps. And American slaves weren't discriminated against either.
AS USUAL, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. "Denying personhood" can only be done to an entity that Objectively Verifiably qualifies as a person. It is impossible to deny personhood to an entity that Objectively Verifiably doesn't qualify as a person.

Scientifically false - a Homo sapiens
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT LABEL MEANS? The word "sapiens" refers to brainpower; many humans have a lot of it, compared to members of other species. But that doesn't mean that just because something is human, it automatically also has brainpower. See your nearest hydatidiform mole for proof!

in the zygote stage of life is as much a
HOMO SAPIENS AS EACH CELL OF A HYDATIDIFORM MOLE. After all, every cell in the mole is a direct descendant of a zygote! The overall entity started out as a zygote, began dividing multiple times, becoming a morula, eventually cracked open the "zona pellucida" that originally surrounds every zygote and emerged as a blastocyst, implanted into a womb, and began stealing nutrients from a woman's body to make even more cells, every one of which is 100% human and has all the DNA of the original zygote. Therefore according to your cherry-picked and thus incomplete/worthless scientific data, you must agree that a hydatidiform mole is just as much a homo sapiens as yourself.

"human being"
IS NOT THE SAME THING AS "HUMAN". The word "being" is a reference to personhood and the brainpower possessed by persons, which ordinary animals lack (and thus we don't call rabbits "rabbit beings"). Any reason you give to deny "human being" status to a hydatidiform mole is the exact same reason that that status can be denied to a zygote and a morula and a blastocyst! All of that group, including the hydatidiform mole (not to mention embryo and fetus) are 100% human and 0% "being".

as a Homo sapiens in any other stage of life.
SEE ABOVE.
 
Last edited:
Right.

And while I'm not certain he and his flunkies were thorough enough to ensure that they did everything by the book in all the other cases, with regards to Jews in particular - who make the lion's share of the victims - they were considered less than human by the state and denied legal personhood.

Wow, I've gone over my number of annual post and replies that I've set for myself.
But, it's been ....interesting. Take care Jay.
 
By this standard Nazis didn't discriminate when they threw those they denied personhood into concentration camps.

And American slaves weren't discriminated against either.

:roll:

Of course, you are wrong. What else is new?

Again this is your imagination and lack of reality getting away from you again, a zygote is not a slave nor was it a Jewish person that the Nazi's exterminated. Making such claims just shows how out there your delusional views on what zygotes are really is.

Scientifically false - a Homo sapiens in the zygote stage of life is as much a "human being" as a Homo sapiens in any other stage of life.

Nope, a human being is a person and a born or close to birth person. You know, the ones who have rights, rights like the woman who have abortions because it is their body, their uterus, not yours and none of your business.
 
Wow, I've gone over my number of annual post and replies that I've set for myself.
But, it's been ....interesting. Take care Jay.

Sure, by all means puss out when you don't have an argument. :2wave:
 
You're banking on the word people, aren't you?

Genocide would be exterminating a specific gene pool, like an ethnicity, race or other hereditary trait. That is clearly not happening with abortion. It could, but it's not.
 
You're banking on the word people, aren't you?

I don't need to walk around in circles walk around in circles walk around in circles walk around in
I don't need to...
 
I'm genuinely glad to learn this. Lots of us made terrible mistakes when we were young...and triumphed over them later.

I would agree the involvement with the minister and the resulting pregnancy were mistakes.

I do not agree her decision not to continue the pregnancy was a mistake...it may have been but than again it not have been, I don't know.

We do know however, that she has been 28 years and if she had had a child and been a single mother she may never have married her current husband.

Many women who have had abortions when they were young and and single, have later gotten married and had children whom love very much and whose marriages last a lifetime vs those who were lifelong single moms.
 
I would agree the involvement with the minister and the resulting pregnancy were mistakes.

I do not agree her decision not to continue the pregnancy was a mistake...it may have been but than again it not have been, I don't know.

But you do know, Minnie. She nearly died. Making a decision that nearly kills you is obviously a mistake.
 
Back
Top Bottom