• 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!

Four Fallacies of Abortion

Angel said:
Your posts are clueless as to morality and logic. I've challenged you to discuss morality and logic in the Philosophy forum and you've declined. Know thyself.
Click to expand...
Lol Peewee is either clueless about how badly he has failed to divert from his failures or he is just being dishonest (again!)
Your attempt to run away from your failure will not work

YOU made claims that you cannot support YOU are trying to run away from that because ou know you cannot defend your own BS

I eagerly await your next post where you will once again dop anything but defend your own BS
you do have a pattern after all.
 
Angel said:
My "sequence" is a logical syllogism. The first premise is a scientific fact. The second premise is a definition.
Click to expand...

No your "sequence" is worthless claptrap because it is just a bunch of you personal subjective opinions
 
Quag said:
Lol Peewee is either clueless about how badly he has failed to divert from his failures or he is just being dishonest (again!)
Your attempt to run away from your failure will not work

YOU made claims that you cannot support YOU are trying to run away from that because ou know you cannot defend your own BS

I eagerly await your next post where you will once again dop anything but defend your own BS
you do have a pattern after all.
Click to expand...

Quag said:
No your "sequence" is worthless claptrap because it is just a bunch of you personal subjective opinions
Click to expand...
I gave you many chances to cease and desist in your trolling of me. Yet you persist. From now on your posts don't exist for me. You're talking to yourself, and the occasional straggler looking for any port in a storm who doesn't know what your posts are about and will "like" your trolling.

I can't say it's been nice talking to you, man. Your posts exemplify the worst aspect of empowered anonymity. Best of luck to you in the darkness.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
I got my context from /Political Discussions / Abortion.

That isn't the same realm as Beliefs / Skepticism / Philosophy. Maybe that's a conflict?

Read your OP: Good/Evil Moral/Immoral and the creation of an Abortion Culture strawman. Do you mean this to be a philosophical debate? Debating anything to do with sex seems to get messy this way.
Click to expand...
Not sure what work you think your "context" point does. Are you saying that because the discussion takes place in a forum labelled "political" one is pre-empted from bringing to bear on a topic critical philosophical analysis?

And your mischaracterization of the OP is noted. I don't know what moral universe this mischaracterization comes from, but if you think the topic of abortion does not call for moral analysis, yours is a universe far from mine.
 
Angel said:
I gave you many chances to cease and desist in your trolling of me. Yet you persist. From now on your posts don't exist for me. You're talking to yourself, and the occasional straggler looking for any port in a storm who doesn't know what your posts are about and will "like" your trolling.

I can't say it's been nice talking to you, man. Your posts exemplify the worst aspect of empowered anonymity. Best of luck to you in the darkness.
Click to expand...
I gave you countless chances to actually debate but you dont want to do that you just want to preach your illogical nonsense without challenge.
SO that leaves you running away again. I guess when you cant defend your BS but want to keep spewing it you dont have much other choice do you?

But I will continue to point out that you NEVER back up your claims and thus all the "arguments" you make based on them are worthless being nothing more than your personal opinions
 
Lursa said:
Really? That's just more avoidance by you...failure on your part because you cant defend your argument.

If you think you can, feel free to point out exactly what I 'carelessly missed' in what you just quoted. I posted direct questions that, if answered honestly, destroy your argument. Of course you dont want to respond.

Or admit you just ran out of road. Otherwise, feel free to directly answer my questions in the post you quoted. It's pretty amusing...anytime someone actually addresses your premises...you start backpeddling and avoiding again. :doh

Here, try again to move the argument forward, by answering:



So all our killing of other animals for our own purposes is immoral?

And all those animals killing to eat...(instead of choosing vegetation to eat)...are all immoral? Entire species of animals are immoral?

And all humans who eat animals or use leather or fur etc....are immoral?

Your post implies yes...so that is what I'll accept unless you claim differently.

So all except mostly naked vegetarian humans are immoral. :)​
Click to expand...
Your reading comprehension stuttered over the words "self-defense" and "reason" -- key terms in understanding the point you presume to reply to.
 
Angel said:
Your reading comprehension stuttered over the words "self-defense" and "reason" -- key terms in understanding the point you presume to reply to.
Click to expand...

And yet...you cannot articulate how and where I'm wrong...you just continue to bob and weave to avoid admitting that your personal opinion on morlity is just that...yours personally and not universal nor self-evident. This current conversation is just an offshoot of a tangent we ended up on as you continued to bob and weave to try and shore up your failed argument.

Answer the questions...or admit you cannot...dont keep pretending 'everyone else doesnt get it.' :doh

So all our killing of other animals for our own purposes is immoral?

And all those animals killing to eat...(instead of choosing vegetation to eat)...are all immoral? Entire species of animals are immoral?

And all humans who eat animals or use leather or fur etc....are immoral?

Your post implies yes...so that is what I'll accept unless you claim differently.

So all except mostly naked vegetarian humans are immoral. :)​

These are all logical offshoots from your premises....why cant you follow thru on them?

And if you dont like the course the discussion has taken, it's your fault for instead of providing the proof we asked for, you keep fumbling with your own series of failed premises which you cant defend. Each one goes in a different direction as you scramble to try and assert your argument.

All you need to do is provide sources that actually support your premises...and you fail to do so time after time.
 
Last edited:
Lursa said:
And yet...you cannot articulate how and where I'm wrong...you just continue to bob and weave to avoid admitting that your personal opinion on morlity is just that...yours personally and not universal nor self-evident. This current conversation is just an offshoot of a tangent we ended up on as you continued to bob and weave to try and shore up your failed argument.

Answer the questions...or admit you cannot...dont keep pretending 'everyone else doesnt get it.' :doh
Click to expand...

He will do neither, reality prevents him from answering and his misplaced arrogance prevents him from admitting that fact.
 
Lursa said:
And yet...you cannot articulate how and where I'm wrong...you just continue to bob and weave to avoid admitting that your personal opinion on morlity is just that...yours personally and not universal nor self-evident. This current conversation is just an offshoot of a tangent we ended up on as you continued to bob and weave to try and shore up your failed argument.

Answer the questions...or admit you cannot...dont keep pretending 'everyone else doesnt get it.' :doh
Click to expand...
I just pointed out "How" in the post you're quoting and ignoring; the "where" is in the post of yours I quoted.
 
year2late said:
FInd me someone on the prochoice side that believes the fetus is not living.
Click to expand...
I was just talking to someone here right on this board who said that, I just cant remember his name (he was very insignificant to me). Furthermore, I believe it took my drilling this piece of information into the pro-choicers for months for you to finally start getting this.

minnie616 said:
Scrabaholic is not joking nor is full of nonsense.

An embryo/ previable fetus is living / alive but according to the definition in article I posted it is not a living being.
Click to expand...
Did you just say an entity that is living/alive is not a living being?
D_NATURED said:
Abortions happen to WOMEN, not fetuses. Don't get it twisted.
Click to expand...
So if abortion "happens to women but not fetuses", why does the fetus go from being alive to being dead?




minnie616 said:
Angel just wants claim that the aborted are human life. He cares not about the miscarried ones ( 15 to 20 percent of pregnancy ) nor about all the zygotes ( fertilized eggs ) that were never even implanted in a woman’s womb ( about two thirds of all fertilized human eggs ) .
Click to expand...
In those instances, the death of the unborn is due to natural cause/s. Whereas in the case of abortion, it is caused by a human agent (the mother). In the latter, there is the issue of criminal liability. In the former, none.


Angel said:
Oy! I've already shown this. To you, Lursa, and the one whose name, like G-d's, she doesn't want uttered.
Click to expand...
May I ask you if you are a Christian, Angel? You don't have to answer this, but I am just curious to want to know more about you.

Bodhisattva said:
Because your argument was stupid...
Click to expand...
Yeah, insult instead of actual rebuttal. I see that.

minnie616 said:
Not when the human life is already dead from a natural cause or is non viable.

Sometimes a non viable fetus ( dead or dying ) fetus needs to be removed before it dies within the woman causing a life threatening septic infection to the woman or sometimes a second or third trimester miscarriages do not expelled the dead fetal tissue on its own and a therapeutic abortion is needed to #urgically remove the dead fetal tissue. If you do not understand than then you are ignorate or completely ignoring my posts and the links I have provided stating a c-section to remove a non viable fetus is still an abortion.
Click to expand...
Why can't you simply answer his question with a yes or no?
 
Wan said:
...
May I ask you if you are a Christian, Angel? You don't have to answer this, but I am just curious to want to know more about you.
...
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm a Christian. Roman Catholic. Twelve years of Catholic education; then another ten of secular higher education. I'm vegetarian, I love dogs and cats and hate assholes, especially assholes with power.
 
Wan said:
I was just talking to someone here right on this board who said that, I just cant remember his name (he was very insignificant to me). Furthermore, I believe it took my drilling this piece of information into the pro-choicers for months for you to finally start getting this.
Click to expand...
So find the post of a prochoicer saying that a fetus is not living and get back to me.

Sounds like made up crap on your part.
 
Wan said:
...


Did you just say an entity that is living/alive is not a living being?
Click to expand...

You took my quote out of context I was talking about an embryo or fetus before viability.

The embryo does not have enough egg sac ( nutrition) to keep it alive without the woman’s bodily functions.


The definition of a living being is a being that has functions that can specifically be called vital because they keep the living being alive and need no other functions to keep it alive.

In other words an embryo would decay without the woman and her bodily functions.
 
minnie616 said:
I agree.

( I bolded your quote where you said with ivf your position of life begins at conception, that it is human life)....

Angel just wants claim that the aborted are human life. He cares not about the miscarried ones ( 15 to 20 percent of pregnancy ) nor about all the zygotes ( fertilized eggs ) that were never even implanted in a woman’s womb ( about two thirds of all fertilized human eggs ) .

He seems not to even to care about nor mention all the surplus frozen embryos in all the fertility clinics that will never even get the chance of becoming a baby because they will never ever even be inside a woman's womb.

How can one claim to care care about human life and call abortion immoral yet not seem to care that for each IVF treatment , about 20 pre embryos ( human life ) are destroyed ?
Click to expand...


Wan said:
....

In those instances, the death of the unborn is due to natural cause/s. Whereas in the case of abortion, it is caused by a human agent (the mother). In the latter, there is the issue of criminal liability. In the former, none.
Click to expand...


Since when are pre embryos being destroyed for IVF coincided natural causes?
 
Angel said:
I just pointed out "How" in the post you're quoting and ignoring; the "where" is in the post of yours I quoted.
Click to expand...

And failed once again to support your claims....100% fail...again.

You are 100% incapable of continuing to argue your stance. Hence your bobbing and weaving and lack of support for your argument.
 
Lursa said:
And failed once again to support your claims....100% fail...again.

You are 100% incapable of continuing to argue your stance. Hence your bobbing and weaving and lack of support for your argument.
Click to expand...
Keep kidding yourself, ma'am. You're very good at it, and I get the impression you derive some satisfaction from it.
It's all the same to me. Our posts are part of the record.
 
Angel said:
Yes, I'm a Christian. Roman Catholic. Twelve years of Catholic education; then another ten of secular higher education. I'm vegetarian, I love dogs and cats and hate assholes, especially assholes with power.
Click to expand...
I am honored that you chose to answer my question, which was of a rather personal nature. Thank you for your answer, Angel.

Also, I used to be a vegetarian too, but fell out of it because I could not resist the taste of meat. I hope you will still want to talk to me again. XD
year2late said:
So find the post of a prochoicer saying that a fetus is not living and get back to me.

Sounds like made up crap on your part.
Click to expand...

First of all, I am not going to find some insignificant nobody's post just to "prove" to you that I did not "make up crap". Neither his opinion nor yours means anything to me. Secondly, I never said that that was the belief for ALL pro-choicers. Surely you agree with me that at least some pro-choicers believe that.

minnie616 said:
You took my quote out of context I was talking about an embryo or fetus before viability.

The embryo does not have enough egg sac ( nutrition) to keep it alive without the woman’s bodily functions.


The definition of a living being is a being that has functions that can specifically be called vital because they keep the living being alive and need no other functions to keep it alive.

In other words an embryo would decay without the woman and her bodily functions.
Click to expand...

So what that the fetus' survival depends on the woman? Being completely self-sufficient is never one of the criteria for being alive. A comatose person also cannot live without the life support system, but would you really insist he is dead?
 
Last edited:
Wan said:
First of all, I am not going to find some insignificant nobody's post just to "prove" to you that I did not "make up crap". Neither his opinion nor yours means anything to me. Secondly, I never said that that was the belief for ALL pro-choicers. Surely you agree with me that at least some pro-choicers believe that.
Click to expand...

So you cannot find one prochoice person that says that a fetus is not living.
 
year2late said:
So you cannot find one prochoice person that says that a fetus is not living.
Click to expand...

I could but won't. And it's not due to inability, it's due to my lack of respect for you and what you think.
 
Angel said:
Keep kidding yourself, ma'am. You're very good at it, and I get the impression you derive some satisfaction from it.
It's all the same to me. Our posts are part of the record.
Click to expand...

And yet...still just comments about me and not your argument...which supposedly you should be able to support. Which you have not. Well, you tried once or twice and failed.

But still...discussion should be on your argument... not me. That's just evidence you are unable to continue with your argument.
 
Lursa said:
And failed once again to support your claims....100% fail...again.

You are 100% incapable of continuing to argue your stance. Hence your bobbing and weaving and lack of support for your argument.
Click to expand...

I told you before Angel doenst debate (I really dont think he understands the concept after all there are so many concepts that appear to be beyond his extremely limited comprehension) all he wants to do is preach and he gets very testy when you dont accept the BS he is shoveling
 
Quag said:
I told you before Angel doenst debate (I really dont think he understands the concept after all there are so many concepts that appear to be beyond his extremely limited comprehension) all he wants to do is preach and he gets very testy when you dont accept the BS he is shoveling
Click to expand...

I do not necessarily think it is BS...I think he frequently is posting his own personal/philisophical views. That just isn't debate.
 
year2late said:
I do not necessarily think it is BS...I think he frequently is posting his own personal/philisophical views. That just isn't debate.
Click to expand...

I agree it is his own personal views the BS part is where he claims it is THE view as proven by his "arguments"
 
Do you know what "scat talk" is, boys and girls?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom