re: Pro-lifer struck with cane, shoved by pro-choice demonstrators

quote:

---

I asked why you defined the "left" line different from the right line when it could be nearly a mirror of the same.

---

nope. the left is not erring on the side of caution with regards to human life. the right is. hank saying that killing a fetus that might or might not feel pain constitutes erring on the side of caution is laughably wrong. can you definitively say that we have captured the baby's right to choose to live in allowing abortion? absolutely not. it's the most absurd thing in the world that people like you are arguing against that and then resorting to insults when your position is faced with resistance.

killing someone for the sake of convenience is murder and is always wrong. the mother's "reproductive rights" do not afford her the liberty of deciding someone's else right to live merely for her lifestyle. arguing against that is just vapid and inane

quote:

---

I think most people would agree that at the point of fertilization, you do not have a fully developed human being

---

is someone who has a genetic defect "fully developed"? are we allowed to murder them simply because they are inconvenient?

quote:

---

You're trying to frame the discussion in your own terms

---

ladies and gentlemen, this is a rhetorical fallacy called special pleading. it means he's trying to punch above his weight class.

you don't even understand the other terms which explains why you can't formulate analytical responses and resort to junior high playground retorts

quote:

---

There are EERIE similarities between Buckeye, NavyTiger and FightinPedoBob..... Ain't sayin' they is, but I ain't sayin' they ain't.... At the very least they get together and circle......

---

quote:

---

In his world, absolutely. Loves to kill babies, that's his thing.

---

hank admitted to as much in my challenge thread

my response

hank has given up in that thread. wonder why. in fact, he hasn't even responded to my questions in this thread. then he called someone else "dishonest"

quote:

---

Well, without getting into the nuts and bolts of your argument with Hank, he has no business calling someone "dishonest".....

---

The fact that Hank is still dismissive when others post from sites he considers too biased is honestly, a thing of beauty.

quote:

---

At some point, everyone agrees that status changes.

---

I think that was always the problem. They used to pin their abortion dreams on "viability" - but there is no good argument as to why medical advancements in the care of premature babies (and that's what the DOCTORS call them, not my "religious" bias, whatever that is) can somehow confer sentience on a human that was previously declared a fetal tissue mass for purposes of acquiring a legal abortion.

They (pro-abortion folks) never wanted to concede that they were advocating ending a human life, which is what every abortion does. This is true whether or not:

A. Rape
B. Incest
C. Save the life of the mother
D. The child would die anyway
E. Mere whim.


They've also, conveniently tried to dance around A. - D. to get to the true, monstrous barbarity of it - that E. is the reason for an overwhelming majority of abortions (90%+ probably closer to 95%).

So, now we've doubled back to the political debate that Roe v. Wade cut off in its childhood - just where exactly can reasonable people agree that the woman's right to end her child's right overrides the child's right to live.

"Fetal tissue" and "parasite" were always going to be (pardon the pun) dead ends for that side.

So here we are - Heartbeat bills and post-birth abortions are the topics du jure. In the United States of America.

If someone attacks you with a weapon, you're not allowed to defend yourself?

News to me...