- Joined
- Oct 5, 2017
- Messages
- 5,695
- Reaction score
- 1,805
- Location
- Madison, WI
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Keep telling yourself that.
LOL. You just contradicted yourself.
No, I didn't. Where so?
Keep telling yourself that.
LOL. You just contradicted yourself.
Child Separation Good; Abortion Bad
Just like the invading fetus...
There is no such thing as an "invading fetus"... Invasion involves an unwelcome intrusion by a person/people (usually with the purpose of taking over or defending a territory)... A fetus makes no such choice, nor has the capability of invasion.
In fact, the parents made the choice for the chance of having a fetus be there. The existence of the fetus in the womb is the sole cause and fault of the parents, not the fetus.
Stop redefining the word invasion to suit your immorality...
My post stating [["Yes, they are recreationally killing off "to-be-born" infants."]] was not an appeal to emotion. It was a statement of truth, and the no-bones way of stating what is happening...
It was a lie unless you are unable to comprehend the words that you use...even after I give you the dictionary definition.
Of course it's not rational to use words in your own invented way and expect other people to understand, respect, or use them that way.
How do you think words came to have meaning in the first place?
No, I didn't. Where so?
Hummm I am begging to see how this works.
When someone talks about an invading fetus they need to stick to the dictionary definition but when you talk about abortion as recreationally killing off “to- be - born infants” you do not need to stick to the dictionary meaning.
Correct.You say that dictionaries don't define words, that words are defined by people.
Correct. There is no possible way that the "zef" can be located anywhere else other than the woman's uterus... That's not what 'invasion' means or entails... You are redefining the term to suit your agenda... You're using it differently here than you do elsewhere...Yet you say that the zef doesn't invade the woman's uterus.
They sure can, but I would argue that there is a more sound way to define the term.If people define words, then people can say it does, even if the dictionary doesn't.
And I'm making mine.(I'm not saying it doesn't, just making a point)
Correct. There is no possible way that the "zef" can be located anywhere else other than the woman's uterus... That's not what 'invasion' means or entails... You are redefining the term to suit your agenda... You're using it differently here than you do elsewhere...
Correct. There is no possible way that the "zef" can be located anywhere else other than the woman's uterus... That's not what 'invasion' means or entails... You are redefining the term to suit your agenda... You're using it differently here than you do elsewhere...
According to you people define words. Why can't I define "Invade"?
BTW, you *do* know that the pregnancy lowers the woman's immune system so that her body does not reject the zef as foreign material, right? I'd say it doing that qualifies as an invasion.
Correct, and you sure can... You do need to follow logic when you do so, however, which you haven't been doing... You also need to argue why your definition is more sound than mine...According to you people define words. Why can't I define "Invade"?
No, that doesn't make it an invasion. The woman made the choice to allow for the chance for the zef to be there in the first place (through the act of sex). The woman brought that chance upon herself... How in the hell is THAT "invasion"?? That seems like she's welcoming the possibility of a zef forming inside her...BTW, you *do* know that the pregnancy lowers the woman's immune system so that her body does not reject the zef as foreign material, right? I'd say it doing that qualifies as an invasion.
I agree that there is some contradictions but that same argument can be just as easily flipped on you.
Abortion is fine
Separating children and capital punishment is inhumane
While I dont share the lock n step the rights views on this topic I will present it if your prepared to defend the conflicts on the lefts stance
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Prove that ants can think! LOL
Hummm I am begging to see how this works.
When someone talks about an invading fetus they need to stick to the dictionary definition but when you talk about abortion as recreationally killing off “to- be - born infants” you do not need to stick to the dictionary meaning.
Recreationally? Please explain why you chose that word.
My post stating [["Yes, they are recreationally killing off "to-be-born" infants."]] was not an appeal to emotion. It was a statement of truth, and the no-bones way of stating what is happening...
Correct, and you sure can... You do need to follow logic when you do so, however, which you haven't been doing... You also need to argue why your definition is more sound than mine...
No, that doesn't make it an invasion. The woman made the choice to allow for the chance for the zef to be there in the first place (through the act of sex). The woman brought that chance upon herself... How in the hell is THAT "invasion"?? That seems like she's welcoming the possibility of a zef forming inside her...
Inversion Fallacy. YOU are the one rejecting logic...Not my fault you can't see logic when it's in front of you.
Argument By Repetition Fallacy. I have already counter-argued this point, but will do so again for the heck of it...Just like if I leave my door unlocked and someone comes in and pistol whips me, it's a home invasion.
Why shouldnt they be seperated? Because they are innocents? They should not be punsished for decissions their parents made for them?There are no conflicts on the left with either of these issues. Children should not be separated from their parents and put into camps and cages for the "crime" of seeking sanctuary in the U.S., and a pregnant woman should be allowed to make her own choices for her own reasons.
So, no... a fetus does NOT invade his/her mother's womb like an unwelcomed person invades a home... Try again...
Incorrect, but hey, that's nothing new.