The husband of our vice president is telling men to "step up" to defend the right to kill a child. Real men will see through this evil charade.

[Hammster]

You don't have to. It's illegal.

That’s what we are fighting for anyway.

 

[Hammster]

"Could there be anything more creepy?"

Clearly implied that nothing could be more creepy. 'Merely' is a fine word to describe the position based on what you wrote. It felt like the late great Chandler Bing was in the room.

If that’s the part of the entire article you want to focus on, have at it. The deflection is expected.

 

[Hammster]

View attachment 354187
That's bait.

That’s truth.

 

[A2SG]

Sure. But they don’t have the right to a fair trial before being executed.

You can't execute an embryo that hasn't developed enough to survive independently.

That’s all we are asking for.

No, you're asking for more than equal rights. Can I take over your body, without your permission or consent, and use it to sustain my own life? Can anyone?

Who would that be equal to?

-- A2SG, doesn't even matter if you're a violinist or not....

 

[Hammster]

You can't execute an embryo that hasn't developed enough to survive independently.

Yes you can. It’s evil to think otherwise.

 

[rubyshoes]

Yes you can. It’s evil to think otherwise.

Indeed - one only needs to look at Trumps new ‘IVF for everyone’ proposal. The amount of embryos discarded during this process should also trigger the ol’ evil meter. Seems both sides take a policy position that discarding life is a-ok

 

[Larniavc]

If that’s the part of the entire article you want to focus on, have at it. The deflection is expected.

I focussed on what you said. If you yourself have further points to make based on your reading of the article please feel at liberty to raise them.

 

[A2SG]

Yes you can. It’s evil to think otherwise.

It's not the correct usage of the term. You're using it to provoke an emotional response, not to be accurate.

-- A2SG, I assume by your lack of response to the rest of my post that you concede the point...

 

[o_mlly]

Maybe you guys oughta work on your skills of persuasion.

Get to persuading then..

Regarding the commission of direct abortions for convenience:

P1: Science does not know exactly when the living being in its mother's womb becomes a human being.
P2: The living being in its mother's womb, if left alone, can only be a human being.
Conclusion: Therefore: In ignorance of that living being's humanity, one may never kill that innocent living being.

 

[Desk trauma]

Regarding the commission of direct abortions for convenience:

P1: Science does not know exactly when the living being in its mother's womb becomes a human being.
P2: The living being in its mother's womb, if left alone, can only be a human being.
Conclusion: Therefore: In ignorance of that living being's humanity, one may never kill that innocent living being.

Now convince a majority of voters in the states which are directly voting on the issue this election and perhaps the perfect record of failure will not continue.

 

[o_mlly]

You can't execute an embryo that hasn't developed enough to survive independently.

I agree. I also agree that executing, ie., willfully killing, a 1-year-old child that "hasn't developed enough to survive independently" is immoral.

 

[o_mlly]

Now convince a majority of voters in the states which are directly voting on the issue this election and perhaps the perfect record of failure will not continue.

I'm trying.

Can you rationally defeat the syllogism I proposed?

 

[Hammster]

Indeed - one only needs to look at Trumps new ‘IVF for everyone’ proposal. The amount of embryos discarded during this process should also trigger the ol’ evil meter. Seems both sides take a policy position that discarding life is a-ok

That is unfortunately true.

 

[Hammster]

I focussed on what you said. If you yourself have further points to make based on your reading of the article please feel at liberty to raise them.

The article speaks for itself.

 

[Desk trauma]

I'm trying.

Failed with me, perhaps work on it.

Can you rationally defeat the syllogism I proposed?

The rights of the woman to her body supersedes those of the fetus and the moral question is best left to her and relevant medical professionals working with her. I’m sure you disagree.

 

[Hammster]

It's not the correct usage of the term. You're using it to provoke an emotional response, not to be accurate.

-- A2SG, I assume by your lack of response to the rest of my post that you concede the point...

It’s accurate. It’s evil to execute the unborn regardless of the stage of growth. It would take a seared conscience to think otherwise.

 

[A2SG]

I agree. I also agree that executing, ie., willfully killing, a 1-year-old child that "hasn't developed enough to survive independently" is immoral.

You're free to believe whatever you like about the morality of abortion. And to not have one, if you don't want one.

And the same for every other individual.

-- A2SG, but only the pregnant woman herself gets to make her own decision about it....

 

[A2SG]

It’s accurate. It’s evil to execute the unborn regardless of the stage of growth. It would take a seared conscience to think otherwise.

Well, you're free to believe whatever you like. But unless you're the pregnant woman, the medical decision isn't yours to make.

If you are, then I certainly won't be telling you what to think or what to do.

-- A2SG, not that you're asking, that is...

 

[rubyshoes]

That is unfortunately true.

Perhaps you can settle my curiosity then. Why is it you felt this endorsement of evil from Kamala’s husband was thread creation worthy, but Trumps promotion of evil was not?

 

[NxNW]

And I have every right to try to support equal protection for the unborn.

But you're pushing for more than equal protection. You're trying to give rights to the unborn that living breathing human beings don't have.

It’s murder, not medical.

You're in the minority with that opinion.