• 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!

A civil debate on the abortion issue

Blue Donkey said:
I already told you to stop posting about yourself and making misogynistic comments here with a strong recommendation not to come back at all.

Other people want to talk about abortion - not making men superior to women like you think they are.
Click to expand...

I have said no such thing as you keep trying to say I did and you need to knock it off. You have no compulsion to reply to anything I post but you do have a compulsion to stop saying my words mean what I did not say if you do choose to reply. Thank you very much.
 
Scrabaholic said:
No, it was not my implication. Do not lie about me again.
Click to expand...

Of course it was your implication. There was no other purpose behind that statement. You got called on it and are now back-peddling.

Human being is a social construct, not a scientific one. A fetus is not a human being. It becomes one upon live birth. FACT.
Click to expand...

Human is not a social construct. It's a scientific classification. A fetus is a human before and after being born.
 
Lursa said:
Ok. Then we shouldnt be able to kill pets either, because they also are provided 'some kind of legal status?'

That's pretty much all that's left of your argument. The unborn have no legal status that protects them. It's only after the fact...it's on behalf of the state and/or woman/parents.

But if you want to finish with the unborn have the same legal status as other animals, that works for me. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Nope...the only point of this line of debate was to prove your comparison wrong. You're now trying to extrapolate from your own failed point being countered to a broader discussion and context where I was not applying it.

So, you basically just admitted your comparison was wrong. That takes maturity. Thanks.
 
Fishking said:
Nope...the only point of this line of debate was to prove your comparison wrong. You're now trying to extrapolate from your own failed point being countered to a broader discussion and context where I was not applying it.

So, you basically just admitted your comparison was wrong. That takes maturity. Thanks.
Click to expand...

What comparison? Sorry, I dont know. Please provide it.

OTOH, I did admit that you were right...the unborn have the same legal status as some other animals. :shrug: Whenever you'd like to apply that to abortion, let me know.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
Click to expand...
 
Lursa said:
What comparison? Sorry, I dont know. Please provide it.

OTOH, I did admit that you were right...the unborn have the same legal status as some other animals. :shrug: Whenever you'd like to apply that to abortion, let me know.
Click to expand...

It took long enough for you to come around that you forgot your own statement.

Lursa said:
Show where federally, the unborn has any greater or lesser legal status than a male's foreskin. Let's see about that comparison.
Click to expand...
 
Fishking said:
It took long enough for you to come around that you forgot your own statement.
Click to expand...

So you lied? Because I dont see a comparison. It's not hard to follow the arrows back.

If you made it up, that's pathetic. If you didnt, please show the post or quote with the comparison.

As for the other...yes I am an adult and I have no problem admitting when someone else makes a point. That it's completely irrelevant to the abortion issue is a different story. But you seem content with it. That's nice.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
Click to expand...
 
What kind of comparison is relevant to the abortion issue? We need to examine the benefits and drawbacks of abortion as they are, not try to grasp at nonexistent straws.
 
Let's move on to a topic completely unrelated to how women get pregnant. Whether rape, incest, or a contraception failure occurred, the result is essentially the same: an unwanted pregnancy. Aside from legal proceedings in sex crime cases, if a pregnant woman wants an abortion, these are some of the things that matter to her after the fact:

1, When a mother learned she is pregnant
2. Wait time and delays to get an abortion
3. Pregnancy complications and symptoms
4. Fetal abnormalities including disabilities
5. Big life changes that can't be prevented

The last one is about things like being forced to move, losing her job, etc. She may want to have a baby, only to lose her ability to take care of one after getting pregnant on purpose.

Now we can examine what really matters to women while they are pregnant, and the issues they face when deciding whether to complete or terminate their pregnancies.
 
What have I got in my pocket?

Omniscient said:
when the sperm is halfway into the egg

duh
Click to expand...

No, in fact it takes a swarm of sperm to get past the egg's defenses & fertilize the egg. That's why sperm aren't produced singly; in the case of sperm, it actually does take a village.

See Human fertilization - Wikipedia

"Sperm preparation
"Further information: Acrosome reaction
"At the beginning of the process, the sperm undergoes a series of changes, as freshly ejaculated sperm is unable or poorly able to fertilize.[9] The sperm must undergo capacitation in the female's reproductive tract over several hours, which increases its motility and destabilizes its membrane, preparing it for the acrosome reaction, the enzymatic penetration of the egg's tough membrane, the zona pellucida, which surrounds the oocyte.

"Zona pellucida
"After binding to the corona radiata the sperm reaches the zona pellucida, which is an extra-cellular matrix of glycoproteins. A special complementary molecule on the surface of the sperm head binds to a ZP3 glycoprotein in the zona pellucida. This binding triggers the acrosome to burst, releasing enzymes that help the sperm get through the zona pellucida.

"Some sperm cells consume their acrosome prematurely on the surface of the egg cell, facilitating the penetration by other sperm cells. As a population, sperm cells have on average 50% genome similarity so the premature acrosomal reactions aid fertilization by a member of the same cohort.[10] It may be regarded as a mechanism of kin selection.

"Recent studies have shown that the egg is not passive during this process.[11][12]

"Cortical reaction
"Once the sperm cells find their way past the zona pellucida, the cortical reaction occurs. Cortical granules inside the secondary oocyte fuse with the plasma membrane of the cell, causing enzymes inside these granules to be expelled by exocytosis to the zona pellucida. This in turn causes the glyco-proteins in the zona pellucida to cross-link with each other — i.e. the enzymes cause the ZP2 to hydrolyse into ZP2f — making the whole matrix hard and impermeable to sperm. This prevents fertilization of an egg by more than one sperm. The cortical reaction and acrosome reaction are both essential to ensure that only one sperm will fertilize an egg.[13]"

(My emphasis - more info @ the URL)

This is an excerpt, of course. There are other considerations, & more ramifications to the process.
 
Lursa said:
So you lied? Because I dont see a comparison. It's not hard to follow the arrows back.

If you made it up, that's pathetic. If you didnt, please show the post or quote with the comparison.
Click to expand...

I quoted you and you deny the reality right in front of you? Rofl...OK.

As for the other...yes I am an adult and I have no problem admitting when someone else makes a point. That it's completely irrelevant to the abortion issue is a different story. But you seem content with it. That's nice.
Click to expand...

It was relevant to you asking me to do a legal comparison between a fetus and a foreskin.
 
Free Thinker said:
She made that choice out of respect for herself. Not to please anyone else. Hoping to teach my daughter the same respect for herself.
Click to expand...

You are a complete hypocrite. Sex for you before marriage needs no self respect. But you hope for your daughters virginity.
 
Trypt said:
Canada is an exception and is quite backward in this regard, treating the unborn as cavemen did, with no regard. Science threw that argument out the window a long time ago, a fetus and a baby are identical in every way, otherwise be prepared to explain scientifically how a premature baby is more of a human being than a fetus later along in the pregnancy.

The abortion argument is identical to the slavery argument, your argument especially is identical. There was a time when arguing for slavery was from a "personhood" or "human" perspective, it is so today from the pro-murder side, but science is making this more and more difficult as more and more girls have access to actual science on the subject, not idiocy and anti-science from their human whatever "studies" course.

You want to define cognitive function then? So because you can't relate to the cognitive function of a newborn, it's ok to kill it? How about a mentally retarder person, how about a coma patient? Ridiculous.

Religion has no place in the argument against the killing of the innocent, this is simply a secular moral argument, supported by biology.

Show me a doctor or biologist who claims a human being is made like magic at birth, the only people who can believe that are religious zealots who believe in silly things like the soul or God injecting personhood upon a certain time of year. Come on now.
Click to expand...

No there is a big difference between slavery an abortion argument. The main one being your continued use of lies about the development of a fetus. There are massive changes throughout the development of a fetus where as you are pretending that only the late stage of pregnancy is what counts. Abortions at that stage are done only for medical concerns.

It is you are bringing up what is nothing more than your own arbitrary condition of abortion. And you are telling lies about when brain activity occurs and when women get abortions for reasons other than their life is threatened by continuing the pregnancy.

Do not pretend your lack of religious excuses for your position makes you any better than the superstitions you deny.
 
Why did you remove my name from the quote? Were you hoping that without a notification, I'd not see it and not respond, then you could claim victory? Or were you hoping that, without the arrows to go to the post, I wouldn't find your post that I was responding to to see what you said?


Trypt said:
Canada is an exception and is quite backward in this regard, treating the unborn as cavemen did, with no regard.
Click to expand...


Canada does the right thing in leaving it up to doctors and their governing bodies.



Science threw that argument out the window a long time ago, a fetus and a baby are identical in every way, otherwise be prepared to explain scientifically how a premature baby is more of a human being than a fetus later along in the pregnancy.
Click to expand...

No, they are not identical. http://pennstatehershey.adam.com/content.aspx?productid=117&pid=1&gid=002395



The abortion argument is identical to the slavery argument, your argument especially is identical. There was a time when arguing for slavery was from a "personhood" or "human" perspective, it is so today from the pro-murder side, but science is making this more and more difficult as more and more girls have access to actual science on the subject, not idiocy and anti-science from their human whatever "studies" course.
Click to expand...

Abortion is not murder. Anti choicers want to make pregnant women gestational slaves. It is anti choicers who are anti science.

You want to define cognitive function then? So because you can't relate to the cognitive function of a newborn, it's ok to kill it? How about a mentally retarder person, how about a coma patient? Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

YOU brought up brain function, not I.


Religion has no place in the argument against the killing of the innocent, this is simply a secular moral argument, supported by biology.
Click to expand...


I didn't say anything about religion.


Show me a doctor or biologist who claims a human being is made like magic at birth, the only people who can believe that are religious zealots who believe in silly things like the soul or God injecting personhood upon a certain time of year. Come on now.
Click to expand...

I don't mock your atheism, please don't mock Christianity.

"Human being" is a social construct, not a scientific one.
 
Highlanders said:
Hysterical..... that is not a relationship, I have no wish to expose your obvious weakness!
Goodness me, get out of that sewer, everyone deserves a loving relationship!
Click to expand...

Methinks you don't know what a relationship is.
 
Fishking said:
Of course it was your implication. There was no other purpose behind that statement. You got called on it and are now back-peddling.
Click to expand...

Since when did you allegedly become omniscient?



Human is not a social construct. It's a scientific classification. A fetus is a human before and after being born.
Click to expand...

It is not a human being. FACT.

Until birth, it's part of the woman's body.
 
Last edited:
Fishking said:
I quoted you and you deny the reality right in front of you? Rofl...OK.
Click to expand...

So where is the quote? Where is the comparison? Why did you respond without it?

You are lying.

It was relevant to you asking me to do a legal comparison between a fetus and a foreskin.
Click to expand...

Yes, LOLOLOLOLOL. And irrelevant to abortion. If that's what it took to convince you, it was time well spent. But a foreskin is not an animal.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
Click to expand...
 
Omniscient said:
When the sperm is halfway into the egg. Duh.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as being "half pregnant." Either she is or she is not pregnant. The only question is when pregnancy begins.

BTW fertilization takes only one second to complete.
 
Blue Donkey said:
There is no such thing as being "half pregnant." Either she is or she is not pregnant. The only question is when pregnancy begins.

BTW fertilization takes only one second to complete.
Click to expand...

halfway through that one second is half pregnant

and who gives a shhit anyway

pregnancy is irrelevant
 
Omniscient, you are definitely NOT acting appropriately in a CIVIL DEBATE thread. Have some respect for homeless girls and women who shed eggs every month.
 
Blue Donkey said:
Let's move on to a topic completely unrelated to how women get pregnant. Whether rape, incest, or a contraception failure occurred, the result is the same: an unwanted pregnancy. Aside from legal proceedings in sex crime cases, if a pregnant woman wants an abortion, these are some of the things that matter to her after the fact:

1, When a mother learned she is pregnant
2. Wait time and delays to get an abortion
3. Pregnancy complications and symptoms
4. Fetal abnormalities including disabilities
5. Big life changes that can't be prevented

The last one is about things like being forced to move, losing her job, etc. She may want to have a baby, only to lose her ability to take care of one after getting pregnant on purpose.

Now we can examine what really matters to women while they are pregnant, and the issues they face when deciding whether to complete or terminate their pregnancies.
Click to expand...

Who wants to debate these issuers in a civil manner?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom