Keyword; physically. Don't you know a ZEF lives inside a woman's womb and is entirely dependent on her body for its own survival? That it is not outside of her until it is born? Are you really this dumb?
No, it is one of what defines an individual and a ZEF is not an individual which mean it cannot have any rights.
Don't feel bad, no other AntiChoicer could ever answer that question either, proving that to them it is all and only about punishing women for having consensual sex ... Thank you for helping me prove that once again...
FoxHastings said: ↑ Don't feel bad, no other AntiChoicer could ever answer that question either, proving that to them it is all and only about punishing women for having consensual sex ... Thank you for helping me prove that once again... Thank you for admitting you dodged questions.....and STILL can't discuss the topic
Not physically. It is part of her body. I cannot believe you are now playing ridiculous games of semantics to argue whether a ZEF lives inside a woman's womb or not. It is getting kind of pathetic.
DNA is physical actually. Therefore distinguishable DNA = physically distinguishable. It's really not difficult man! Good luck finding the post in which I questioned whether or not a ZEF lives inside a woman's womb.
Are you stupid or are you just purposefully being annoying? Do you think a ZEF just pops up in the crib out of the blue or do you know that it lives and grows inside the woman first? That it is not physically separated from her until it is born? Then why are you being purposefully stupid? Geez. Furthermore, DNA is not what gives us rights. Your hair, skin, salivia and every other part of your body carries DNA too, but you would not say saliva has rights, would you? Even viruses carry DNA.
Well now you are introducing a new element: physical separation. Please confirm: are you talking about physical individuation, or physical separation? Now you're changing the subject. We're not talking about what gives us rights. We're talking about what makes someone "physically individuated." Remember? That's YOUR thing
So when 'DNA' is brought up, that's when you pull out of debate @Ritter! It's clear that abortion is an uncomfortable argument for you at that point!
I have no idea what you are trying to do or say here. You are trying to argue against a factual statement about ZEFs living and growing inside a pregnant woman. That is just idiotic.
Previously you introduced a new element to the debate: physical separation which is different to physical individuation.
Just admit you have now realised you are out of arguments, have nothing to add or say and therefore have to turn to this stupid game of semantics where you will not do anything but ask vague questions until I give too broad - or too vague - of an answer, so that you then can go; "oH yEaH? HaHa, bUt wHaT aBoUt cOnJoibEd TwInZ???" or something dumb like that.
Ask vague questions? I simply stated that previously you introduced a new element to the debate: physical separation which is different to physical individuation. Unless you're actually saying that they're the same thing. You can either clarify, or just admit that my ruthless scrutiny is too much for you to handle.
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED to deny others retained by the people.
If a woman retains ANY rights whatsoever, such rights would have to include her personal health care.
