As if the girl hadn't gone through enough, then they killed her child.

[n9newunsixx5150]

So in order for me to present a 'valid point', everyone must agree with it. In that case, you have presented no valid points as I do not agree with them.

No. I did not state this.

Many people believe in many things. The reason why there is such a strong debate regarding abortion and using embryonic stem cells for research is because of this difference in opinions on what constitutes life. Science says one thing, religion says another. Even among these two extremes there are many shades of grey. I don't care which view you choose to believe in, the fact is that many people believe in each. It is therefore rather ridiculous that you try to rationalize anti-abortion comments because of your views on life (you are but one of many).

Many people can believe in many things or many non-things. I don't give a shit. That has nothing to do with my points. I already explained this. I am not concerned with opinions. I want only facts.

The fact is that the entity resulting from the fertilization of a human egg exists at the point of... fertilization of a human egg! (Whether or not we CALL it a "human" life at this point is semantics) Do you see how simple and logical that is? Are you contesting this point? If so, please present your case. Otherwise we can move on to my next point.

As everyone here has said time and time again, this argument is pointless. I am not going to shift my position and neither are you.

Then your position is objectively wrong. You can be wrong. Nobody will stop you.

 

[Hutch]

No. I did not state this.

Yes you did. You stated, and I quote "'for many people' is not a valid point". I said that many people believe that life does not form immediately upon conception, and you said it is not a valid point. You and many others claim that life starts immediately upon conception, so following on from your statement, IT IS NOT A VALID POINT.

The fact is that the entity resulting from the fertilization of a human egg exists at the point of... fertilization of a human egg! (Whether or not we CALL it a "human" life at this point is semantics) Do you see how simple and logical that is? Are you contesting this point? If so, please present your case. Otherwise we can move on to my next point.

It is not merely semantics, that's the whole point. I don't care if that small bundle of cells will eventually form a human, at such an early stage it is highly debatable whether it is 'human' (definitely not factual). It may become a human eventually, but if it not yet a human then does it deserve the same rights as 'fully-fledged' humans? Why? Do you justify your position based on the fact that it will eventually develop sufficiently to be considered alive? If so, then do you think minors should be trialled as adults? They'll all become adults eventually. Your counting your chickens before they hatch.

Then your position is objectively wrong. You can be wrong. Nobody will stop you.

You don't speak for the whole world, and suggesting as much is rather arrogant of you. Replace the objectively with subjectively and your statement is accurate, which again leaves us at this stalemate.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

Yes you did. You stated, and I quote "'for many people' is not a valid point". I said that many people believe that life does not form immediately upon conception, and you said it is not a valid point. You and many others claim that life starts immediately upon conception, so following on from your statement, IT IS NOT A VALID POINT.

NO. I DID NOT. My stating that the "for many people" argument is invalid does not conclude therefore that all people must agree for it to be valid. That is what you implied in response to what you quoted above. I am saying that "many people" or "most people" or "all people" or "midget people" or whatever other kind of people is not a valid argument. You are correct in saying that my point is not valid due to it being accepted by any amount of people.

It is not merely semantics, that's the whole point. I don't care if that small bundle of cells will eventually form a human, at such an early stage it is highly debatable whether it is 'human' (definitely not factual). It may become a human eventually, but if it not yet a human then does it deserve the same rights as 'fully-fledged' humans? Why? Do you justify your position based on the fact that it will eventually develop sufficiently to be considered alive? If so, then do you think minors should be trialled as adults? They'll all become adults eventually. Your counting your chickens before they hatch.

You simply define "human" your own subjective way. I choose not to speculate, but instead stick with the facts. Here they are:

a) Human parents produce human offspring.
b) Human egg fertilization is the initiation required for a human existence.

Therefore,

c) upon the conditions of b) and the knowledge of a) we are legitimately dealing with a human existence.

You want to justify destroying this human existence on the basis of it's current stage of development. This consideration is subjective since we know, without doubt, that we are dealing with a human existence. Otherwise, if we don't know this, then you can show me the scientific experiment that resulted in human parents generating dog progeny or tree progeny or lizard progeny, etc, etc. If you can show humans reproducing anything other than human, then you have room to argue.

You don't speak for the whole world, and suggesting as much is rather arrogant of you. Replace the objectively with subjectively and your statement is accurate, which again leaves us at this stalemate.

The whole world and logic are two different things. Even the whole world can call stalemate. That doesn't make it a logical fact.

 

[HERESY]

Also, foreknowledge makes us responsible. Even if it is somehow reasoned that the fermented egg isn't considered a human life until 2 months into the pregnancy, foreknowledge that this is a human life makes us responsible. No amount of word-jugglery will change the facts.

916 said that, and I believe its a very good point.

 

[EDJ]

^MORALLY SPEAKIN'.

 

[HERESY]

^^^Elaborate.

 

[EDJ]

^FROM A MORAL STANDPOINT THAT'S A gREAT POINT.