ADVERTISEMENT

Roe V Wade

Answer my original question.

Do you save the new born baby or the 2 fertilize eggs?

This should be easy for you unless you're morally disingenuous.


This has to be the most disingenuous question that has ever been posed on this board. Its a convenient and lazy way to put a person into a tough hypothetical situation that can't be answered. I would save the baby because it can undoubtedly feel pain and has advanced through maturity to the point that there is no question of whether it could be killed out of convenience by the mother, and if it was she would certainly be prosecuted for murder.

A better question is if there was a fire and you had to chose between saving a 2 year old and a 10 year old, which would you choose?
 
And for the record, I would save the baby and then cum all over the fire to put it out. Like a firehose of procreation.
 
I’m still waiting to learn when the last time a sperm miraculously burst into a human fetus on its own.
 
Refer to previous statement about moving goal posts. You just did it again. Arguing about what something COULD become and not what it IS. What it could become is irrelevant. And lol at the suicidal sperm, or the murderous egg ending the sperms life!
Suicide and Murder both require sentient intent (i.e. a choice is made to commit the act), something neither a sperm nor an egg have. You’re the one who said the sperm was alive. I’m saying that the sperm is no longer a distinct entity at all after it fuses with the egg and the single-cell zygote is formed.

I love that you have a pet phrase that you think makes you smart, but I have never moved any goalposts. I have maintained that a fertilized human egg is a human life from conception and stays a human life until it dies. I would just like everyone to admit that so we can have an honest conversation. You seem to be going through all sorts of contortions to not admit that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1ofTheseKnights
I look forward to the day that the US becomes as enlightened as the european nations in regards to abortion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFBS
I look forward to the day that the US becomes as enlightened as the european nations in regards to abortion.
STDs as well, especially teenage transmission rates (sans the UK). The French are rather impressive, but it's a cultural thing. They responsibly address sex, instead we Americans making it about promiscuity, danger and taboo -- totally immature and unsustainable too, with serious health impacts.

Everyone knows abortion is killing. I've never liked a woman who thought otherwise, and they are few and far between. Women who are insensitized to it are going to have it any way, regardless of the law. That's just the reality.

When the state helps women with options, options they can select by choice (and not shouve down their throats), the system works much better. The problem with the right to choose is -- just like on the right to self defense -- you have a lot of ignorant people arguing for things that are just blatantly at odds with science and statistics.

And that's where I take issue. Not only Abortion or the 2nd Amendment, but on the ignorance. And how do we allow that? Because we've allowed ourselves to argue a media narrative, driven by their interests, instead of the real issues and problems. We used to not blame the NRA or Planned Parenthood, but now we do. Why? Media blame, sensationalism, conflict-driven advertising.

The only way to move forward is to opt-out of it all, and discuss the real issues. If we ever did, we could actually tackle the environment, healthcare, immigration, etc... But until then, we're going to argue over things that actually do not matter at all, actually do not address the real issues and are 100% media narrative driven now.

I guess that's why I really have as much problem with the Democratic party these days as Trump et al. It's, "We're not Trump" as much as Trump says "Fake News," and to me, I think they'll all a bunch of total idiots who don't remotely have a clue of what the real issues are and -- more importantly -- solutions that we should actually try.

If anything, the last 2 years of President Obama's administration proved that you can do all sorts of stupid crap, and make things far worse -- even if you went 180 degrees from things that weren't working in the 6 years before. And no, I don't mean the economy, because borrowing money always works there ... until you cannot afford to do so any more.
 
STDs as well, especially teenage transmission rates (sans the UK). The French are rather impressive, but it's a cultural thing. They responsibly address sex, instead we Americans making it about promiscuity, danger and taboo -- totally immature and unsustainable too, with serious health impacts.

Everyone knows abortion is killing. I've never liked a woman who thought otherwise, and they are few and far between. Women who are insensitized to it are going to have it any way, regardless of the law. That's just the reality.

When the state helps women with options, options they can select by choice (and not shouve down their throats), the system works much better. The problem with the right to choose is -- just like on the right to self defense -- you have a lot of ignorant people arguing for things that are just blatantly at odds with science and statistics.

And that's where I take issue. Not only Abortion or the 2nd Amendment, but on the ignorance. And how do we allow that? Because we've allowed ourselves to argue a media narrative, driven by their interests, instead of the real issues and problems. We used to not blame the NRA or Planned Parenthood, but now we do. Why? Media blame, sensationalism, conflict-driven advertising.

The only way to move forward is to opt-out of it all, and discuss the real issues. If we ever did, we could actually tackle the environment, healthcare, immigration, etc... But until then, we're going to argue over things that actually do not matter at all, actually do not address the real issues and are 100% media narrative driven now.

I guess that's why I really have as much problem with the Democratic party these days as Trump et al. It's, "We're not Trump" as much as Trump says "Fake News," and to me, I think they'll all a bunch of total idiots who don't remotely have a clue of what the real issues are and -- more importantly -- solutions that we should actually try.

If anything, the last 2 years of President Obama's administration proved that you can do all sorts of stupid crap, and make things far worse -- even if you went 180 degrees from things that weren't working in the 6 years before. And no, I don't mean the economy, because borrowing money always works there ... until you cannot afford to do so any more.


So any thoughts on the rationale involved in Roe V Wade? Was the due process clause of the 14th amendment an appropriate means of making abortion legal?
 
And for the record, I would save the baby and then cum all over the fire to put it out. Like a firehose of procreation.

Thanks for proving my point. You value the life of an actual living baby over a cluster of cells in a test tube.

If you truly believed what you claim to believe, you would save the 2 fertilized eggs because in the conservative world, that = 2 babies. You would always choose to save 2 babies over 1.

But with this simple test, we see through your charade. You clearly demonstrated that you do not see the two as equal, because they are not.

Case dismissed.

My work here is done.

Trel National Champ.

Parade next Tuesday at Disney.
 
Thanks for proving my point. You value the life of an actual living baby over a cluster of cells in a test tube.

If you truly believed what you claim to believe, you would save the 2 fertilized eggs because in the conservative world, that = 2 babies. You would always choose to save 2 babies over 1.

But with this simple test, we see through your charade. You clearly demonstrated that you do not see the two as equal, because they are not.

Case dismissed.

My work here is done.

Trel National Champ.

Parade next Tuesday at Disney.
Do you actually believe this is a rational argument?
 
Thanks for proving my point. You value the life of an actual living baby over a cluster of cells in a test tube.

If you truly believed what you claim to believe, you would save the 2 fertilized eggs because in the conservative world, that = 2 babies. You would always choose to save 2 babies over 1.

But with this simple test, we see through your charade. You clearly demonstrated that you do not see the two as equal, because they are not.

Case dismissed.

My work here is done.

Trel National Champ.

Parade next Tuesday at Disney.


False. I laid out my rationale and it is predicated on pain. Your hypothetical is faulty which is why I laid out a better example. Better yet would be asking to choose between a woman who is 5 months pregnant and a newborn.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT