"It's a child from the moment of conception"?

nice appeal to popularity - http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html
and a touch of appeal to common practice - http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-common-practice.html

wow two fallacies in such a short reply.

Misery of your own making due to the inability to accept change and attempting to cling to historical precedence based on nothing but outdated ideology.

 

and an appeal to emotion

 

an abortion would just mean the spirit would just pick a different shell, no harm no foul, no problem

and for Christians that think God only gives us one shot to be human, they believe babies that are killed get a free pass to heaven, would not the same apply to a fetus via that logic... is that a bad thing? a free pass to heaven...

for those Christians that do not believe babies that die get a free pass... I at least hope they believe their God is good enough to let them live a different human life rather then say too bad so sad, to "hell" with you little baby ... cause that kinda God would sound kinda evil...


.

 

Only abusive leftwing (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s know what "feminism" means because you change the definition to whatever affords you best bullying opportunities at any given time. Since that is the real reason you pretend to believe your lies.

 

I know this is a waste of time with someone like you who has made up their mind what feminism is but I'll give it a try:
From the Oxford Dictionary
"""feminism


noun


The advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men."""

See, it doesn't mean "Big Bad Evil Women plotting to destroy little tiny helpless innocent men" .

 

No, it's NOT a "silly question"...it's a question based on the RHETORIC of the "pro-lifers", who claim it's a "child" or a "person" at fertilization.

So either you can answer "Okay, at WHAT POINT in fertilization is that true"....

or you can admit you do NOT believe it is a "child" or "person" at fertilization and explain further....

or you can...as you have...desperately try to change the subject.

 

Strange thing is it has little to do with women's rights, it is about equal rights .. why should a man (or non pregnant woman) have the right to protect their body against unconsented injuries when a pregnant woman cannot?

 

Because from a moral perspective, pregnancy is a very unique situation.

 

Sam, at what EXACT point does a pregnancy begin?

 

Couldn't careless about your moral perspective and neither will the courts where ultimately any future decision on abortion will be made.

 

I never said morality should be the sole factor in whether or not abortion should be legal.

 

Who said you did say that? Are you seeing things???

And what don't you get about the FACT that YOUR morals DO NOT MATTER to anyone but you....certainly not to the courts and laws...

 

Having an abortion is not always a move inspired by bloodlust but screaming for abortion day after day after day, like these guys do, is.

It's clear they are exceedingly passionate about convincing complete strangers to kill.

 

What guys scream for abortion ?

 

Children are born...

 

and I never stated that you did .. yet more misrepresentation from you, becoming a habit. Try reading what I actually wrote for once will you.

 

High school biology... take a class. LOL

 

you mean like those guys who scream day after day after day for state controlled wombs and super rights for the fetus?

It's clear they are exceedingly passionate about convincing complete strangers to turn pregnant woman into state controlled incubators.

 

Afraid to answer?


What does IAF stand for ????? Afraid to say???

 

It's clear..."pro-lifers" won't answer questions....like the one in the OP.

 

Anyone can have an opinion, but is it informed ?

Did you have any proof (or even a valid argument) for your claim that a zygote is a living human or do you prefer just to troll ?

 

We discover in questions like this, that the "pro-lifers", as much as being intellectually dishonest...


are intellectually "un-armed".

As noted before, it's likely, locked in a cocoon of Rightwing Media, Fundamentalist Christian Media, "pro-life" websites, etc.....where "difficult" questions are never raised nor stated beliefs are questioned for their validity, factual basis, or even LOGICAL basis....


that they come to a forum like this....are faced with such questions....and unable to answer them, have to desperately attempt to dodge, deflect, and change the subject.... or scream "That's a dumb quesiton...I'm not even going to validate it with a response".....

out of the simple reason they have never HAD to answer such questions, nor seen them raised in their Media and the answers given to them.

As the old joke goes....they just don't come to a "gun-fight with a knife"....they come to it without even the knife....or even a stick laying on the ground....because nobody ever told them that "guns" exist.

 

It's a child when the soul decides to enter the foetus, which can be anytime from conception to movement through the birthing canal. The soul generally waits until the foetal development is sufficient for it to begin connecting with foetal neural and brain tissues for it's joined life experience together. It is extremely rare for the soul to enter at conception. It's worth noting that abortions don't affect the soul, which can return at a later pregnancy and still be born to the same parent(s).

 

Begs the question, prove there is such a thing as the soul.

 

And if you want to use that as basis for any kind of argument on abortion that relates to anyone whatsoever other than you alone, prove conclusively that a soul exists first, then we'll work our way out from there.