• 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!

“The abortion rate was lower ... where more women live under liberal abortion laws.”

Mashmont said:
Interesting that as a 'conservative', you feel the need to attempt prop-up a pro-abortion leftwinger. But you couldn't do any better than Lursa could.
Click to expand...

We didnt fail...like you did...and everything else is 'better' than failing.

For example, I note that you cant dispute where we provided the #s that corrected your claims about how few women get medically necessary abortions.
 
Mashmont said:
There is only ONE difference between a human zygote and and an adult human being, and that is stage of development. Nothing else.
Click to expand...

False.
There are many differences between the unborn and the born including the fact the Born are not inside and attached to the
bio mother.
 
Last edited:
minnie616 said:
False.
There are many differences between the unborn and the born including the fact the Born are not inside and attached to the
bio mother.
Click to expand...

That falls under stage of development, which is the ONLY difference.
 
Mashmont said:
That falls under stage of development, which is the ONLY difference.
Click to expand...

You seem to forget that two thirds of zygotes fail to survive long enough to even become embryos.

Two thirds of zygotes pass right through the body without implanting or self abort within the first week of implantation.

Another 15 to 20 of known pregnancies ( where the woman is aware she is pregnant ) naturally miscarry.

God is aware the vast majority of zygotes will never survive to see the light of day ( or birth if you prefer ).

Why do think God values every zygote when his plan was that the vast majority would not even make to embryo stage?

My religion believes God values living souls therefore the newborn receives a living soul when they take their first breath known as the “ breath of life.”
 
Mashmont said:
There is only ONE difference between a human zygote and and an adult human being, and that is stage of development. Nothing else.
Click to expand...
That is about as ignorant and stupid as it can possibly be. If the same reasoning is applied to a load of construction material only a true moron would call it a house.
 
prometeus said:
That is about as ignorant and stupid as it can possibly be. If the same reasoning is applied to a load of construction material only a true moron would call it a house.
Click to expand...

Silly example. Construction materials are inanimate objects, not living beings. But you can't refute my point. Zygotes don't go through any fundamental changes to make them into something else, such as an unfertilized egg has to in order to become a chicken. If a human zygote receives care and avoids injury, it WILL become an adult human being. And the only difference between the two is stage of development.
 
minnie616 said:
You seem to forget that two thirds of zygotes fail to survive long enough to even become embryos.

Two thirds of zygotes pass right through the body without implanting or self abort within the first week of implantation.

Another 15 to 20 of known pregnancies ( where the woman is aware she is pregnant ) naturally miscarry.

God is aware the vast majority of zygotes will never survive to see the light of day ( or birth if you prefer ).

Why do think God values every zygote when his plan was that the vast majority would not even make to embryo stage?

My religion believes God values living souls therefore the newborn receives a living soul when they take their first breath known as the “ breath of life.”
Click to expand...

Well, everyone dies in time. Are you saying a compassionate God would never allow that?
 
Peter King said:
Except it isn't. Just like the concept of brain death means death, the term brain birth is also something that people are considering as the start of "life". And it does not change the fact that a zygote does not have rights that equal or even close to those the pregnant woman.

And who the hell are you to try and ban women from choosing just because you believe in some religion? And personhood is a legal concept and it starts at birth.
Click to expand...

Since you, by your own admission do not know the precise moment at which 'life' is conferred, you do not have the right to play Russian roulette with a baby's life. My definition of human life does not take the chance of taking that life.
 
year2late said:
Interesting you left out the most important component - birth.

Up to birth, the fetus is completely reliant on the physiology of one specific person.

The law makes the judgement of personhood.

I personally had several life threatening complications and surgery to boot....lost 6 months of work lost a promotion....went into heavy debt for nearly a decade over my pregnancy. I still have some medical issues related to my pregnancy. These were totally unexpected complications. I was active, the right age, no pre-existing conditions, good health. I was lucky to have a very skilled OB that saw subtle signs and took them seriously. GUess what. Most women who choose abortion do not have my excellent access to health care and ability to follow MD instructions without considering if the loss of a day of work would make me homeless or place me in a shelter.

A person has bodily autonomy for a reason. Only that person knows their own resources.
Click to expand...

It's astounding to me, that though all that rhetoric, not ONE mention is made of a baby. No concern at all to what is good for the baby. While the majority of women would willingly and naturally put the needs of their offspring ahead, sadly there are still a minority of women who think it's all about them.
 
Mashmont said:
It's astounding to me, that though all that rhetoric, not ONE mention is made of a baby. No concern at all to what is good for the baby. Why do some women think it's all about them??
Click to expand...

Rights are granted upon birth
 
Mashmont said:
Since you, by your own admission do not know the precise moment at which 'life' is conferred, you do not have the right to play Russian roulette with a baby's life. My definition of human life does not take the chance of taking that life.
Click to expand...

I have a decent idea when the fetus should have rights and I know perfectly well personhood rights do not start at conception. So I am playing Russian roulette with no-one, other than you who is playing Russian roulette with women's lives and women's rights. And again, babies are what is the result of a live birth, not a zygote.

And again, if you want to see that as the start of life, good for you, you are free to have no abortion. You however have no right to interfere in what other people want to decide about their own bodies.
 
Mashmont said:
It's astounding to me, that though all that rhetoric, not ONE mention is made of a baby. No concern at all to what is good for the baby. While the majority of women would willingly and naturally put the needs of their offspring ahead, sadly there are still a minority of women who think it's all about them.
Click to expand...

1. no babies will ever get aborted

2. at least women who think it is about them are right about that. Which makes the pro-lifers who think it is all about them and their views even bigger women-rights haters.
 
Peter King said:
I have a decent idea when the fetus should have rights and I know perfectly well personhood rights do not start at conception. So I am playing Russian roulette with no-one, other than you who is playing Russian roulette with women's lives and women's rights. And again, babies are what is the result of a live birth, not a zygote.

And again, if you want to see that as the start of life, good for you, you are free to have no abortion. You however have no right to interfere in what other people want to decide about their own bodies.
Click to expand...

Just change a few words and use your same logic:

"If you disagree with rape, good for you. You are free not to rape. You however have no right to interfere in what other men want to decide about their own bodies"
 
Last edited:
vegas giants said:
Rights are granted upon birth
Click to expand...

Notice I didn't use the term 'legal rights' This is why we're having the entire debate. We believe the laws are wrong and should be changed.

Why do you people always talk in circles?
 
Mashmont said:
Since you, by your own admission do not know the precise moment at which 'life' is conferred, you do not have the right to play Russian roulette with a baby's life. My definition of human life does not take the chance of taking that life.
Click to expand...

An easy stance to take when you know your body will never suffer the ravages of pregnancy, isn't it?
 
Scrabaholic said:
An easy stance to take when you know your body will never suffer the ravages of pregnancy, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Michelle Duggar is looking pretty good after 19 kids.
 
Mashmont said:
Silly example.
Click to expand...
Yea, because it shows how utterly moronic your assertion was.

Construction materials are inanimate objects, not living beings.
Click to expand...
So what?

But you can't refute my point.
Click to expand...
Do not delude yourself, you had no point only a stupid assertion.

Zygotes don't go through any fundamental changes to make them into something else
Click to expand...
Read a ****ing biology book.
 
Mashmont said:
Since you, by your own admission do not know the precise moment at which 'life' is conferred, you do not have the right to play Russian roulette with a baby's life. My definition of human life does not take the chance of taking that life.
Click to expand...

Life begins when the sperm fertilizes the egg. This is basic science. That is objective fact.

If you choose to "confer" value on that stage or any other stage of human development...that is your opinion. In case you havent gotten the idea yet...*you* dont get to force your opinion on women.

But it does come down to again, "who says?" Who says the unborn have a right to life? What authority that you can force on women in this country?
 
prometeus said:
.

Read a ****ing biology book.
Click to expand...

Oh, please don't imply dishonest things. I said (human) zygotes grow up to be adult humans. They don't change into something else, as in another species.
 
Last edited:
Lursa said:
Life begins when the sperm fertilizes the egg. This is basic science. That is objective fact.
Click to expand...
You just made my whole case for me. Everything else you said is negated and meaningless. Thanks.
 
Mashmont said:
Semantic games don't justify your killing of a growing developing human being.
Click to expand...

Not games, correct use of human development terminology and the law.

It's completely justifiable...the woman's needs justify it and before birth, that justification is hers and hers alone. Her life, her health, her providing for her dependents, her responsibilities and obligations to community, etc...all those are total justification that no one else knows nor has any business knowing.

If you need to use emotional manipulation to try and make your point, it just shows how weak your argument is.
 
Lursa said:
Life begins when the sperm fertilizes the egg. This is basic science. That is objective fact.

If you choose to "confer" value on that stage or any other stage of human development...that is your opinion. In case you havent gotten the idea yet...*you* dont get to force your opinion on women.

But it does come down to again, "who says?" Who says the unborn have a right to life? What authority that you can force on women in this country?
Click to expand...
Mashmont said:
You just made my whole case for me. Everything else you said is negated and meaningless. Thanks.
Click to expand...

No...the fact that you pretend your opinion matters on the value of that life is where you clearly fail. Proof: you completely avoided answering the bolded question. How about trying again?

And your opinion is by law negated and meaningless.
 
Mashmont said:
Just change a few words and use your same logic:

"If you disagree with rape, good for you. You are free not to rape. You however have no right to interfere in what other men want to decide about their own bodies"
Click to expand...

Nobody i saying men should be stopped from deciding what to do with medical decisions about their body. But your idiotic comparison that stopping them from raping is us deciding men cannot decide about their own bodies is insane to the maximum. Because rape is not something you do to your own body, it is something MEN to do OTHER PEOPLE.
 
Mashmont said:
Semantic games don't justify your killing of a growing developing human being.
Click to expand...

Is not your right to determine. It is not your body and you have no right to make that determination until the state has a logical right to determine that a woman does not. For example if the pregnancy is too advanced for an elective abortion procedure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom