"Pro-Choice" or "Pro-Life"

[Phinehas2]

To EnemyPartyII,

You havn't addressed any of my challenges to yours either. You pretend they didn't happen and ignore them.

Are you sure? My apologies please repeat them if that’s the case.

The only "challenges" of yours I havn't responded to are the ones that don't make anly logical or gramatical sense.

For someone who doesn’t even know the dictionary definition of human as human being, I hardly think you are in a position to make that claim.

MY point... is that even though a foetus will, under the right conditions, develop INTO a person, it is not a person YET. Merely having the POTENTIAL to be something doesn't make something the same as what it has the potential to be. An acorn has THE POTENTIAL to be an oak tree, an oak tree has THE POTENTIAL to be a bed... but that does not mean that they are all interchangeable.

But if its me and I am a person then it is a person. Your point contradicts itself. Its not a case of potential for the foetus to develop, the potential is it won’t develop and abortion is one of the dangers. Naturally the person develops from zygote to foetus, to baby to child to adult. That is develops sentience at one stage and puberty at another is no reason for some to suggest one criteria determines how viable a person is.

I disagree. It wouldn't have been you that was aborted, because you, in the sense of the sentient, self aware being that is you, didn't exist YET.

You see the problem is if it wasn’t me who would have been aborted who was it. Your view is merely based on your arbitrary criteria of sentience, but no even those who hold your view can agree when that happens. So regardless of the pro-life position which has no doubt about when a life and person begins, the pro-choice abortion position cant even agree when the person begins.

Strongly disagree.

so what was added?

literally millions of things had to be added to the foetus that became you for it to become "you". Not to mention all the water and nutrients, your intelect, experience, personality, and sense of self awareness all had to be added, since none of these things were present in the foetus in the womb. [/quote] Sorry but the water and nutrients have to be added to all life, my intellect wasn’t added, how was it added? Who added it? Do you understand the distinction between ‘add’ and ‘develop’

The physical is PART of you,

Ok so even on your basis you were partly wrong.

Read the rest of the definition. Human CAN mean "human being", but it can ALSO mean only related to, or coming from human beings.

Sorry but you said

Humans are organisms.

is said why terminate the life of human beings by abortion and you replied

They aren't human BEINGs. Not all organisms are human BEINGS.

As you see from the dictionary definition a human is a member of the species homo sapiens: a human being, so your claim it isn’t, is evidently wrong according to the dictionary!!

I'm pro-life, please remember that.

Pro-life means no abortion by choice.

So no, we don't all agree on when a person becomes a person.

So how does the pro-choice abortion lobby know they aren’t licensing the killing of people if they can’t decide when they become people?

And I'm waiting to hear any reason to think your decision about when a person is a person is any less arbitrary than mine?

Because its not arbitrary. Do you understand what arbitrary means? Its having only relative application or relevance; not absolute. Unless you can tell me how life naturally begins apart from conception of sperm and egg, it is not arbitrary.

Well I mean, I have scriptural and scientific support to back up my position, you have, what, a thoroughly out of context bible verse about a child leaping in a womb? Which doesn't mention conception as being the start point of personhood anyway?

On the contrary, as to the issue, if you are suggesting life does naturally begin other that the conception of sperm and egg and gestation then you don’t have scientific support or Biblical support. I cant see why one would put their trust in bad science than God who was supposed to be a believer in God.

Besides a well qualified professor or surgeon who amputates a leg instead of an arm because he can’t tell the difference is in my view, if not in his and others views, in error. and I would be leaving such a hospital.

 

[Phinehas2]

deleted.. repeat

 

[EnemyPartyII]

*throws hands up* Can't cope. Out.

 

[Phinehas2]

To EnemyPartyII,

Thanks for the debate.

 

[Phinehas2]

I think pro-choice abortion has been exposed as contraditctory and fatally flawed.
We can see life starts at conception and gestation, its observable. The life develops from zygote stage to foetus, born baby, child, adult. Its obviously as person all the way, how could it not be, what is conceived develops.
The pro-choice abortion argument doesnt think the aborted foetus is a person because they have decided in their wisdom that sentience is a criteria to distinguish between a development of life that is viable and one that isnt, though they cant agree when it is.
Therefore those that see viability at 10 weeks must see abortions up to 24 weeks as terminating the life of a person.

 

[lux et lex]

I think pro-choice abortion has been exposed as contraditctory and fatally flawed.

No, I think it's just been exposed that it's impossible to have an intelligent debate with you.

 

[Phinehas2]

Lux et lex,

No, I think it's just been exposed that it's impossible to have an intelligent debate with you.

Of course not, you would need an intelligent argument to be able to match mine to do so. That has been my whole point. If you dont agree you might like to address my post #473

 

[JT912]

What nonsense is this I'm hearing about pro-choice? Abortion is the fruit of sexual immorality in our American culture. It is the serious circumstance that occurs from sex outside of marriage. Over 50 Million babies have been aborted since Roe V Wade and scripture is very clear on this issue.

Isaiah 49:1, 5 "The Lord hath called me from the womb, from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name... to be his servant, to bring Jacob again unto him..."
Galatians 1:15 Paul said he was "called from my mother's womb."
Psalms 139:13-16 The psalmist wrote of his being "formed in secret," in his mother's womb, referring to himself in such a state, "yet imperfect (incomplete)," as "I" – that is, a person (Psalm 139:13-16).
Any person claiming to be a "Christ like" must understand that he/she has transferred over from darkness to light into the Kingdom of God-Col 1:13
he/she must recognize that the Word of God is flawless and God inspired 2 Tim 3:16, Thirdly he/she must recognize that he/she is now operating in a Kingdom and not a democracy, he/she serves one King, Jesus Christ and His decrees are what matters He runs the show and not us. We must be willing to give up our individualistic and humanistic mentalities if he/she truly wants to grow in the truth.

 

[lux et lex]

Alright, then why if the fetus/embryo/zygote is a person, do we not endow it with legal rights? That's part of personhood, isn't it?

It's not a person...think of this mess for example if it was...

The father of a fetus that is, say, 4 months in gestation, dies with a will that leaves "property to all my children in equal shares". Does the fetus take a share of the property? If it's a person, it would because it's considered an child of the father. Let's take it one step further. One month later the property owning fetus is miscarried. Where does that property go? Perhaps you'll say to the fetus's mother because she would be an heir because the fetus would obviously die intestate (without a will). Okay, that's probably true because the mother is an heir. Let's go one further. Let's take a fetus that is 1 month in gestation, so early in the pregnancy the woman is not yet aware she is with child. Father of the fetus dies with the same will as before "property to all my children in equal shares". Property is divided among the known heirs. A few months later the woman finds out she's pregnant with the deceased man's child. Can the fetus, who was a person, but an unknown person, at the time its father died sue for its property rights? If so when? Pre birth or post birth?

 

[seajoy]

No, I think it's just been exposed that it's impossible to have an intelligent debate with you.

How demonizing.

 

[seajoy]

What nonsense is this I'm hearing about pro-choice? Abortion is the fruit of sexual immorality in our American culture. It is the serious circumstance that occurs from sex outside of marriage. Over 50 Million babies have been aborted since Roe V Wade and scripture is very clear on this issue.

Isaiah 49:1, 5 "The Lord hath called me from the womb, from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name... to be his servant, to bring Jacob again unto him..."
Galatians 1:15 Paul said he was "called from my mother's womb."
Psalms 139:13-16 The psalmist wrote of his being "formed in secret," in his mother's womb, referring to himself in such a state, "yet imperfect (incomplete)," as "I" – that is, a person (Psalm 139:13-16).
Any person claiming to be a "Christ like" must understand that he/she has transferred over from darkness to light into the Kingdom of God-Col 1:13
he/she must recognize that the Word of God is flawless and God inspired 2 Tim 3:16, Thirdly he/she must recognize that he/she is now operating in a Kingdom and not a democracy, he/she serves one King, Jesus Christ and His decrees are what matters He runs the show and not us. We must be willing to give up our individualistic and humanistic mentalities if he/she truly wants to grow in the truth.

What an excellent, intelligent post. What a blessing when the Holy Spirit helps one to write in this manner. God's continued blessings.

 

[max1120]

The motive of the pro-choice is pure selfishness and greed. Their god is sex thus they cant let anything get in the way of their sexual gratification. They dont admit it but then sexual intercourse does cause pregnancy, one cant naturally get pregnant without it so their arguments are rather embarrasing.
Sex has its place, no-one on the pro-life side says otherwise, that view is just a smear, but with it comes responsibilities.

Again it is "Pro-Life" or should we say "Anti-Choice" groups which are deeply disturbed about sex. They are obsessed with the subject. As I have clearly pointed out restricting and abolishing sexual freedom is at the forefront of their agenda. The true agenda of the "pro-life" groups (at least if they are honest) is to put women back in time "barefoot and pregnant". They want to do away with contraception in addition to ending the right to choose. They want to make the birth control either much less available or outlawed all together. They oppose condoms ( they could care less if millions die from HIV/AIDS ). They are only interested in one thing...stopping sex except as they approve of it. I doubt any intelligent, rational person really wants to go back to the dark ages and live that way. We are going to move forward (although perhaps more slowly than I would like) and eventually these ways of thinking will become extinct.

 

[Zebra1552]

MOD HAT ON

This thread is closed for review due to multiple reports.

MOD HAT OFF
​