Should trying to conceive a child be made illegal if personhood starts at conception?

[Gregory95]

With the exception of rape, agreed.



Probably because it's utter nonsense.

Assuming that the woman in question is trying to get pregnant and has unprotected sex during her most fertile time -- about 2 days before ovulation -- she has about a 20-25% chance of getting pregnant. An other time in her cycle, and the chances drop considerably, to about 5%

And we're not even taking birth control into account. The various BC methods out there -- ranging from pills to prophylactics -- have a 95-98% effectiveness rate... which means even on those rare occasions when they do fail, the woman is still only looking at a 5-25% chance of pregnancy.

So... sex does not = pregnant. How this is like mystic wisdom only a few understand is, sadly, all too easy to realize... the state of sex education being what it is.



I am so glad you said "that being said..." as the premise of your argument has been shown to be false, the remainder of it can be round-filed without much difficulty.

A wise person once noted that it is a foolish man who builds his house upon the sand...

But, I'm willing to continue regardless.




We both know this will not last long.



As would I.



Doubtful. Whike a few might think twice, others would consider it prudent to kill their victims to prevent them from accusing them. A man already facing death has nothing left to lose.

That said...

It is not the severity of punishment that deters crime, it's the certainty. If you could guarantee that every rapist would be caught, convicted, and sentenced, that would make it happen less often.



Agreed. However, "fault" is irrelevant.

You want no emotion?

Try this:

That "life" is an inconvenience.

Still want to take emotion out of the equation?




I see you've abandoned the "no emotion; just truth" facade rather quickly... I suspect that you will have already composed a sufficiently indignant rant against my "inconvenience" comment before you chose to read this far.

So much for "no emotion; just truth."



Yes, it would. And in a perfect world, that would happen every time.

No emotion.

Just truth.

The backlog inherent in our foster care system should be ample evidence that our world is far from perfect, and at the risk of sounding cynical, isn't going to change anytime soon.

Missed the point on everything

 

[Gregory95]

With the exception of rape, agreed.



Probably because it's utter nonsense.

Assuming that the woman in question is trying to get pregnant and has unprotected sex during her most fertile time -- about 2 days before ovulation -- she has about a 20-25% chance of getting pregnant. An other time in her cycle, and the chances drop considerably, to about 5%

And we're not even taking birth control into account. The various BC methods out there -- ranging from pills to prophylactics -- have a 95-98% effectiveness rate... which means even on those rare occasions when they do fail, the woman is still only looking at a 5-25% chance of pregnancy.

So... sex does not = pregnant. How this is like mystic wisdom only a few understand is, sadly, all too easy to realize... the state of sex education being what it is.



I am so glad you said "that being said..." as the premise of your argument has been shown to be false, the remainder of it can be round-filed without much difficulty.

A wise person once noted that it is a foolish man who builds his house upon the sand...

But, I'm willing to continue regardless.




We both know this will not last long.



As would I.



Doubtful. Whike a few might think twice, others would consider it prudent to kill their victims to prevent them from accusing them. A man already facing death has nothing left to lose.

That said...

It is not the severity of punishment that deters crime, it's the certainty. If you could guarantee that every rapist would be caught, convicted, and sentenced, that would make it happen less often.



Agreed. However, "fault" is irrelevant.

You want no emotion?

Try this:

That "life" is an inconvenience.

Still want to take emotion out of the equation?




I see you've abandoned the "no emotion; just truth" facade rather quickly... I suspect that you will have already composed a sufficiently indignant rant against my "inconvenience" comment before you chose to read this far.

So much for "no emotion; just truth."



Yes, it would. And in a perfect world, that would happen every time.

No emotion.

Just truth.

The backlog inherent in our foster care system should be ample evidence that our world is far from perfect, and at the risk of sounding cynical, isn't going to change anytime soon.

Here let me help you

Probably because it's utter nonsense.

Do you not understand the basics of life?

It is a foolish man who builds his house upon the sand...


But, I'm willing to continue regardless

Seriously just want you to re read that and remember you were trying to insult me

Doubtful. Whike a few might think twice, others would consider it prudent to kill their victims to prevent them from accusing them. A man already facing death has nothing left to lose.


That said...


It is not the severity of punishment that deters crime, it's the certainty. If you could guarantee that every rapist would be caught, convicted, and sentenced, that would make it happen less often


Isn't that what we've been trying at a failed rate?

Agreed. However, "fault" is irrelevant.

Only to those who love the lie

You want no emotion?


Try this:


That "life" is an inconvenience.

Obviously we know that's what you people think

have you not not seen my first posts pointing out its selfishness on the part of people like you

Still want to take emotion out of the equation?

Yes look at the truth

I see you've abandoned the "no emotion; just truth" facade rather quickly... I suspect that you will have already composed a sufficiently indignant rant against my "inconvenience" comment before you chose to read this far.

So much for "no emotion; just truth."

It is not rocket science to understand the difference between basing your idea on emotion and not truth

rather then being emotional about the truth

You say a life is inconvenient thus it is okay destroy

This is emotional picking what is easier

truth without care for your emotions would say

Pull up your big boy/girl pants time to grow up

Yes, it would. And in a perfect world, that would happen every time.

No emotion.

Just truth.

The backlog inherent in our foster care system should be ample evidence that our world is far from perfect, and at the risk of sounding cynical, isn't going to change anytime soon.

It won't change because people in the majority only care for themselves

Kinda ties back into that selfish thing again don't it

 

[Gregory95]

If you can't make a reply, just say so.

Avoiding the truth some more

The promoters of the lie act like their job is to ignore the truth and divert

Oh wait that's exactly their tactic

 

[TLK Valentine]

Missed the point on everything

Not from where I'm standing.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Here let me help you

I suspect you're going to try whether I "let" you or not. But please, continue...

Do you not understand the basics of life?

Well, as I was not the one who premised the entire first part of my argument on the ludicrously false premise that "sex=pregnant," I'd say I've got the upper hand on "the basics of life."

Seriously just want you to re read that and remember you were trying to insult me

Not at all! I was trying to correct you. The premise of the first part of your argument was fundamentally flawed, which shot your conclusions down the tubes. I chose to explain this.

Isn't that what we've been trying at a failed rate?

Shamefully so. Less than 1% of rapes lead to felony convictions. The death penalty will not change that.

Only to those who love the lie

Meaningless statement.

Obviously we know that's what you people think

You claim "just truth; no emotion" and yet can't even be bothered to mask your contempt for "my people."

have you not not seen my first posts pointing out its selfishness on the part of people like you

And here, while still operating under the "just truth; no emotion" facade, you attempt a shaming technique to modify my attitude.

"Still want to take emotion out of the equation?"

Yes look at the truth

And the truth, I must say, is that you're not doing a very good job of taking emotion out of the equation -- as I've just pointed out.

The game only works if we both play by the rules you set.

It is not rocket science to understand the difference between basing your idea on emotion and not truth

Whenever you're ready, do so. Thus far, you've been doing the exact opposite.

rather then being emotional about the truth

Let's examine the truth.

You say a life is inconvenient thus it is okay destroy

This is emotional picking what is easier

The truth is, you're wrong. It's not "emotional picking" (whatever you believe that to mean), but pragmatism.

There is no emotions required in choosing the easiest option precisely because it is the easiest option.

truth without care for your emotions would say

Pull up your big boy/girl pants time to grow up

Actually, no -- again, it would be the exact opposite.

"Put on your big boy/girl pants and grow up" is an emotional appeal. Specifically, it's a shaming technique, similar to the one you (unsuccessfully) attempted earlier, to discourage allegedly "immature" behavior.

Try again -- without the emotional outbursts this time.

It won't change because people in the majority only care for themselves

Kinda ties back into that selfish thing again don't it

I await your truthful, non-emotional solution to that facet of the human condition.

 

[Gregory95]

I suspect you're going to try whether I "let" you or not. But please, continue...



Well, as I was not the one who premised the entire first part of my argument on the ludicrously false premise that "sex=pregnant," I'd say I've got the upper hand on "the basics of life."



Not at all! I was trying to correct you. The premise of the first part of your argument was fundamentally flawed, which shot your conclusions down the tubes. I chose to explain this.



Shamefully so. Less than 1% of rapes lead to felony convictions. The death penalty will not change that.



Meaningless statement.



You claim "just truth; no emotion" and yet can't even be bothered to mask your contempt for "my people."



And here, while still operating under the "just truth; no emotion" facade, you attempt a shaming technique to modify my attitude.




And the truth, I must say, is that you're not doing a very good job of taking emotion out of the equation -- as I've just pointed out.

The game only works if we both play by the rules you set.



Whenever you're ready, do so. Thus far, you've been doing the exact opposite.



Let's examine the truth.



The truth is, you're wrong. It's not "emotional picking" (whatever you believe that to mean), but pragmatism.

There is no emotions required in choosing the easiest option precisely because it is the easiest option.



Actually, no -- again, it would be the exact opposite.

"Put on your big boy/girl pants and grow up" is an emotional appeal. Specifically, it's a shaming technique, similar to the one you (unsuccessfully) attempted earlier, to discourage allegedly "immature" behavior.

Try again -- without the emotional outbursts this time.



I await your truthful, non-emotional solution to that facet of the human condition.

All you have done is avoid

Ill leave you to re read as ive litteraly spent all day with you people

We keep telling you the same truth over and over

You keep jumping from here to there

 

[InterestedAtheist]

All InterestedAtheist is capable of doing in this debate is use subjective and arbitrary arguments that are founded on categorical mistakes. Then, after being unable to acknowledge this, he will usually shift to red herrings to shift the debate.

The reality though is that the scientific community is in agreement that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization.

The question then is what does this mean? What people like IA want to do is fabricate a made up distinction between a human being and a human person and then assert that only human beings have moral worth and value.

This is an impossible to support philosophical belief that can only be argued from a subjective frame of reference. I get it though, it’s the only way that we can mentally rationalize killing our very youngest.

SPF, you take defeat gracefully.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

All you have done is avoid

Ill leave you to re read as ive litteraly spent all day with you people

We keep telling you the same truth over and over

You keep jumping from here to there

Gregory, you haven't started saying anything yet. Read the article, try to engage with it, and we'll see where we go from there.

 

[Gregory95]

For the last time here is the truth

As seen in the video it is a life

It is simple

The reason you need articals and what men think is because you deny what is proven before your eyes

You look for a scapegoat to justify your beliefs

Where as if you only wanted truth upon seeing the truth you would have changed


More truth is that no matter why the life is there

it isn't the life's fault therefore no one has a excuse to destroy

These are simple truths

You seek not truth but justification

Have a good day i hope one day your heart is softened

Gregory, you haven't started saying anything yet. Read the article, try to engage with it, and we'll see where we go from there.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

For the last time here is the truth

As seen in the video it is a life

It is simple

The reason you need articals and what men think is because you deny what is proven before your eyes

You look for a scapegoat to justify your beliefs

Where as if you only wanted truth upon seeing the truth you would have changed


More truth is that no matter why the life is there

it isn't the life's fault therefore no one has a excuse to destroy

These are simple truths

You seek not truth but justification

Have a good day i hope one day your heart is softened

Gregory, you haven't started saying anything yet. Read the article, try to engage with it, and we'll see where we go from there.

 

[TLK Valentine]

For the last time here is the truth

As seen in the video it is a life

It is simple

The reason you need articals and what men think is because you deny what is proven before your eyes

You look for a scapegoat to justify your beliefs

Where as if you only wanted truth upon seeing the truth you would have changed


More truth is that no matter why the life is there

it isn't the life's fault therefore no one has a excuse to destroy

These are simple truths

You seek not truth but justification

Have a good day i hope one day your heart is softened

Such an emotional appeal... a pity it's no substitute for truth.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Gregory, you haven't started saying anything yet. Read the article, try to engage with it, and we'll see where we go from there.

I know, right?

He keeps going on about "life" as if:

1. It is inherently sacred and deserving of protection (an emotional appeal)

2. All life in any form is equally sacred (an absurd presumption)

The truth of course is that neither of these things are even remotely true. This planet has experienced five major extinction events in its history, and is currently in the middle of its sixth... which we, as human beings, are directly responsible for.

We are the only species on this planet (IIRC) that kills members or our own and other species solely for the pleasure of killing. While many other species engage in pack behavior, we are one of only two creatures on this planet that ups the scale by forming organized armies solely to kill other members of our species (ants being the other).

We are homo sapiens -- ending life is what we do. We've gotten very good at it, and we're always seeking newer and more efficient ways to do it.

 

[Gregory95]

I know, right?

He keeps going on about "life" as if:

1. It is inherently sacred and deserving of protection (an emotional appeal)

2. All life in any form is equally sacred (an absurd presumption)

The truth of course is that neither of these things are even remotely true.

Thank you for reinforcing my beliefs are correct

 

[TLK Valentine]

Thank you for reinforcing my beliefs are correct

Was there ever any doubt?

"No emotions; just truth" was a bad idea... you really shouldn't have suggested it.

 

[Gregory95]

Was there ever any doubt?

"No emotions; just truth" was a bad idea... you really shouldn't have suggested it.

So wrapped up in your self established pride you fail to even see you destroyed your own argument

 

[TLK Valentine]

So wrapped up in your self established pride you fail to even see you destroyed your own argument

If you have truth, now would be the time to share it.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Thank you for reinforcing my beliefs are correct

So wrapped up in your self established pride you fail to even see you destroyed your own argument

 

[Gregory95]

If you have truth, now would be the time to share it.

a national socialists will say destroying the life of "undesirables" is morally acceptable because they are a drain on the productive

Also

in the case of the all non aryans a national socialist will say they are not human you see the national socialists deny the truth we are all humans and justify it by our differences inside and out

But the truth is we are all humans just like even though there is many different fish some extremely different then others they are in truth all fish

As a EX national socialist i can tell you when you buy the lie it seems just like truth in fact you hold the lie so tight you mock anyone who disagrees you elevate yourself to the point you look down on all who haven't "woke up yet" back then i truly believed it was acceptable because it was "for the greater good"

Furthermore why don't you look into how the national socialists sold the murder of the mentally ill to the public you will see the "personhood" argument is in line with national socialist doctrine

Now to go full circle

i ask you why is it okay to destroy a life that has done no wrong

you say life is not sacred

Thus if no life is sacred how can you hold yourself. Your partner family or children above that of a fetus

You can't so you your partner children etc and the fetus are on equal ground

Therefore if anyone deems you or any of yours a "inconvenience" as others deem a fetus do they not have the equal right to destroy their life as you do a fetus

Also if you truly believe no life is sacred you should applaud people who massacre others like Hitler Stalin or any of the shooting such as sandy hook. Because based on your belief those people i would call evil according to your belief are rather liberating others and showing societies false idea of life IS sacred

 

[Gregory95]

If you have truth, now would be the time to share it.

In case it is not obvious I will say it

Those who hold no value to life have zero right to say who lives and dies

Otherwise you get

Hitler's Stalin's maos etc

 

[Gregory95]

lppl up the founder of planned parenthood she was a racist

Look up why she started planned parenthood