You mean facts? Yeah, they are relevant and integral to the discussion.
My point was that there was emotion used in the argument with the facts. The woman is struggling to pay the bills, she gets pregnant and can't take care of a child and work at the same time. I say again, that argument right there is a prime example of emotion being used along
with some facts. The emotion is to get the listener to sympathize with the woman in the bad situation. That is where the pro-choice side uses emotion.
And yet, most...and I do mean most...pro-life supporters dismiss it all, valuing the unborn more than the real life struggles and suffering and choice to do the responsible thing by the woman. And being able to fulfill your responsibilities to your current kids and other dependents, your obligations and commitments to employer, community, society...all reasonable and factual, but dismissed as less important than the unborn.
You're using the emotion along with the fact that she can't take care of a child. You see how it works? It goes
both ways and you're doing it right now. I'm not trying to refute any of your arguments here, I already have in previous threads, I'm trying to make the point to you that "emotional manipulation" is used on BOTH sides of the abortion debate, and you're doing it right now.
I think I only come across that way because few, if any, pro-lifers ever honestly explore the legal aspects of the discussion. And there can be no changes to abortion outside of the law. If the tough questions would be addressed directly and honestly by pro-life people, maybe we'd see a rational, logical discussion.
I believe I've answered your questions before and you didn't like the answers I gave. I can't help you with that. But aside from that, I am trying to have a rational discussion right now. You don't like emotion in arguments yet you use it yourself. I am trying to make the fact clear to you that pro-choice and pro-life people both do it. That is a rational claim, but you are the one being irrational by changing the subject to the actual abortion debate instead of admitting that pro-choice people use emotion as well. :/
Let's be clear: there is ZERO reason to be sympathetic to pro-life people. THEY are not suffering a thing. They are not affected IN ANY WAY by strangers having abortions. Pro-choice means that every woman may decide for herself what is best for her...that means she is perfectly welcome to choose giving birth.
First of all, I didn't say pro-lifers were suffering. I said they have problems with it.
Also - You are doing it again. Using Emotion.
"they are not suffering a thing." You imply that woman who require abortions are going through great suffering. While I'm not saying that isn't true, you are using emotion to strengthen the point you are making.
Pro-lifers are deeply distressed when they see the unborn being killed. I see that you are never going to sympathize with pro-life people, and at the same time you want me to sympathize with struggling women.
Well guess what. I already do. I think it's terribly stressful to get pregnant and not know what you are going to do, and I'd gladly help the women in anyway I can OUTSIDE of abortion. But you refuse to understand why pro-life people are pro-life. You claim they are not effected in any way. If they are not effected, then why is there such a thing as pro-life people? Do you think they have a hidden agenda and are covering it up by faking their distress over millions of lives being ended before they've barely started? If you think that, you haven't bothered to understand the pro-life side at all. Listen to what actual pro-life people say instead of what your side says about them.
So I ask again. We all know the unborn are human, alive and innocent. So why would it be so hard to imagine why someone would see a problem with the termination of that life?
My points are about emotion being used in arguments, which you used
a lot here. Not saying it's wrong to use emotion, but to say only pro-life people do it is misleading as you have just done a whole lot here.