The myth that pro-life views oppress 'women'

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by SpaceCricket79, May 11, 2013.

  1. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    64,220
    Likes Received:
    13,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ROFL What kind of fallacy is this now, an appeal to yourself.

    You, nor anyone else has ever "proven" that the zygote is a living human.

    When you were attempting to give such a proof in threads many months ago you were presenting fallacy and claiming it was proof.

    Some of it was beyond silly such as the oft heard " The zygote is a human because its a human" Have you figured out yet that this is a logical fallacy ?

    Have you figured our what an argument even is yet ? That an argument consists of 1) a premise or claim and 2) reasons or evidence that show why that claim is true.

    Have you figured out yet that "Is a human" is not evidence for why the claim "A zygote is a human" is true ?

    Restating your premise, regardless of how many times you do it does not show why your claim is true. It just restates your claim.

    Your new claim "The zygote is a living human because - I have proven it" is a pathetic joke.

    Hopefully you have come up with something that is actually an argument.

    I am excited to hear this "proof".

    The zygote - single cell at conception- is a living human because ..... your turn.
     
  2. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,025
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually , as a very wise poster said, IF it's a "person", that strengthens the argument for abortion. No "person" has super rights over another "person". IF it's a "person" with rights it also has the same restrictions as other "persons" and has no right to harm another "person". (something that has been explained to you a dozen times)

    And NO amount of denial negates the fact that pregnancy, the presence of a fetus , harms women....and NO proof has EVER been given that it doesn't.

    Women do not lose their right to self defense because they are pregnant. ...so they may use that right against the fetus ( a "person") to protect themselves.

    To take away women's right to self-defense is oppressing women....
     
  3. Cady

    Cady Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    8,661
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The pro-choice position is based on a woman's right to bodily autonomy. The pro-life position is based on the belief that a zygote is "a little person." I think my position is safe.
     
  4. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Things that were legal before have become illegal, so there is hope that this disgusting practice will be ended.
     
  5. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    No, the fact is you refuse to read it. Go back and read then we can talk and you will not look so out of touch with reality.
     
  6. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    There is no doubt scientifically that a fetus is a living human. Where have you been for the past several decades? Why all this ranting about something that you are so easily proven wrong on? A zygote is undeniably the first stage every human being goes through. EVERY HUMAN BEING IS A ZYGOTE AT THE POINT THEY ARE CREATED!
     
  7. Zeffy

    Zeffy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,654
    Likes Received:
    405
    Trophy Points:
    83
    You might want to look up what an analogy is. And I accept your surrender.
     
  8. Cady

    Cady Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    8,661
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I refuse to go searching for "proof" that cannot exist. If you think you have proved something that is impossible to prove, and scholars throughout all of time have not resolved, then you are the one who looks out of touch with reality.
     
  9. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    MOD EDIT - Rule 3
    Well at least you admit you refuse to read the proof I posted. The only thing that cannot be done here is change your mind. You have it made up and no amount of facts will change it. That much is obvious. I do enjoy watching you squirm though when you cannot refute my posts.
     
  10. Cady

    Cady Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    8,661
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    48
    MOD EDIT - Rule 3 I don't know if I read what you call "proof," but regardless there can be no such "proof." No rational person believes they know when life begins, they understand it is one belief among many.
     
  11. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    "I refuse to go searching for "proof" that cannot exist." yeah if you refuse to search for it, you also refuse to read it. Logic, get some. All rational people know that every human being begins at conception and is a human being from that point forward. There is no debate here.
    - - - Updated - - -

    Thanks for proving my point. ;)
     
  12. Cady

    Cady Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    8,661
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I might have read what you call your "proof." I've read a lot of your posts, and none contained what you think is proof. I know, for example, you think the UVVA is proof of personhood, but it doesn't even mention personhood, excludes abortion, and only applies on Federal property, so it is proof of nothing.

    It's a religious belief, most scientists disagree.
     
  13. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,025
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Another ridiculous, unfounded , unproven assertion.. Abortion has been around legally and illegally since about the time humans have been around.

    When it was illegal it did not stop .....
     
  14. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    WRONG! The UVVA clearly recognizes a child, who is in utero, is a person, otherwise how could they be protected by law against homicide? Many state laws concerning fetal homicide also prove the personhood of a fetus, since a homicide cannot be committed against a non person. Homicide is by definition the killing of a person.

    I know that you think a law has to include the word "person" to recognize personhood, but that is just simple minded nonsense.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Unproven eh? So you don't believe slavery was once legal but then later was deemed illegal? :rolleyes: Huh, where have you been?
     
  15. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,025
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What does slavery have to do with abortion? Nothing.



    Anything can be legal and then illegal and then legal again...like liquor.

    BUT that does NOT change the fact that making abortion illegal did NOT end abortion.... and it never will. :)
     
  16. Smarty

    Smarty New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2014
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Republicans always want less government interaction/regulation...except when it comes to controlling what others do with their bodies. So hypocritical!
     
  17. Cady

    Cady Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    8,661
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    48
    It is only YOUR misguided opinion that a child-who-is-in-utero is a person. A child-who-is-in-utero is not a natural person, meaning:

    "A human being, naturally born, versus a legally generated juridical person."
    http://thelawdictionary.org/natural-person/

    Lawmakers do not have the authority to determine that a fetus is a person. A child-who-is-in-utero is a juridical person, and juridical persons don't have the same rights that natural persons do.
     
  18. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Not a natural person? A fetus is as organic as any person out there. You are really stretching beyond the bounds of reason ....again.

    When you can explain to me how a human fetus isn't human, get back to me. When you can explain how a homicide can be committed against a non person get back with me.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The best example of how people can awaken and understand that people who were previously considered less than a human being actually are people and human beings.
     
  19. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,025
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You forgot the rest of my quote and what we were discussing:

    " Anything can be legal and then illegal and then legal again...like liquor.

    BUT that does NOT change the fact that making abortion illegal did NOT end abortion.... and it never will. """"


    And you have no proof that making abortion illegal will end it.
     
  20. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,025
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Where's that proof that making abortion illegal will end it??? Same as all your other proof", nonexistent.
     
  21. Cady

    Cady Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    8,661
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Obviously you create your own reality. Black's Law Dictionary definition for "natural person" doesn't say ANYTHING about "organic." In law, there are two kinds of persons. A natural person is one that is born, which means the fetus is the other kind, a juridical person.

    Who said a human fetus isn't human? So are a sperm and ovum, but no one tries to claim they are persons.

    Under the UVVA, homicide can be committed against a juridical person. It's been explained to you dozens of times.
     
  22. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    She probably thinks the fetus is some sort of silicon-based lifeform...


    [​IMG]
     
  23. Cady

    Cady Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    8,661
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Is this what you do when the facts are against you?
     
  24. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,025
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes :)
     
  25. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sorry, it was an inside joke. Obviously you were never a big fan of Star Trek.
    Many posters probably did not get the joke, but hopefully a few got a laugh out of it.
     

Share This Page