Good Pro-Life Arguments

[Vonsalza]

You accused me of saying something I clearly did not say. Your implied apology and admission of defeat on this is accepted, moving on.

Stillborn and miscarriages are not abortion, and as I’ve already said many times, perceived personhood is a non argument for abortion. And besides- what is, isn’t necessarily what should be.

For supporters of choice, it’s often the argument.

I believe what you just said is called fallacy of irrelevant conclusion.

… how does it differ from a non-sequitur?

It is true that many women die from childbirth. There are also plenty studies out there documenting the vast number of deaths within a year after abortion,

From the CDC 700 women died in the US in 2017 from just shy of 4 million births. So 17.5 deaths per 100,000 births.
From this publication (The comparative safety of legal induced abortion and childbirth in the United States - PubMed) gives 0.6 deaths per 100,000 abortions between 1998 and 2005. Same period women suffered 8.8 deaths per 100,000 births.

In America, abortion is medically safer for the mother than birth. Especially now, it seems.

Contraception is not deliberate abortion, they are two completely separate things. Nice try on the gotcha thing, but it didn’t work.

Hey - for the record - I think it’s great you think contraception isn’t abortion. There’s just plenty of folks here who don’t agree with us.

Except premise 1+2 plus your last statement doesn’t connect in any way to the right to choose abortion

Of course it does.
The fetus in utero isn’t considered “person” enough to override the agency of the mother on the matter. This is why.

You just don’t agree, but that doesn’t make it a non sequitur. You just don’t really know how to identify them - which you’ve displayed with some consistency.

The unborn child/fetus is doing exactly what it is programmed to do at that stage of life. It makes them no less human and no more inferior than any one of us.

But it is less a “person” which is what it’s about for pro-choicers.
It’s no surprise - the Gallup poll on it shows clearly that most Americans support 1st trimester abortion and most Americans do not support 3rd trimester abortions. They think it’s more a “person” at that time.

And before you go errantly bleating “ad populum” - realize that it’s only an ad populum if truth is not determined by the majority. For democracy, that’s exactly who determines what truth and law are.

A “great majority” eh?

Yup. Hitchens, before he died, have a good talk where he sourced that 97% of folks who work in academic research are either atheist or non-religious. I’m afraid I didn’t keep the source, but I believe him.

 

[laylow]

I think most folks see it just like you do - particularly if the damage you incur to save the stowaway is very likely to be lasting.

There’s no obvious choice.

I think it is similar to the self defense justification.

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

Can you explain the logical distinction between the following:

You said you were consistent with those views in everything that doesn’t affect you.

Those things do affect me.

 

[laylow]

Yup. Hitchens, before he died, have a good talk where he sourced that 97% of folks who work in academic research are either atheist or non-religious. I’m afraid I didn’t keep the source, but I believe him.

Most of Hitch’s talks were good!

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

Yup. Hitchens, before he died, have a good talk where he sourced that 97% of folks who work in academic research are either atheist or non-religious. I’m afraid I didn’t keep the source, but I believe him.

Most of Hitch’s talks were good!

I disagreed with a lot of his points and always his tone, but he was brilliant. Zero doubt.

Most know Dawkins only because Hitchens died and could therefore no longer outclass him.

 

[laylow]

I disagreed with a lot of his points

I assumed you probably would…

always his tone

He was a self-proclaimed disrupter, which I appreciated since I believe there is a need for informed ones.

but he was brilliant.

A master of debate using controlled concise points, due to a vast vocabulary and extremely quit wit. I could listen to him debate all day…

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

I disagreed with a lot of his points

I assumed you probably would…

always his tone

He was a self-proclaimed disrupter, which I appreciated since I believe there is a need for informed ones.

but he was brilliant.

A master of debate using controlled concise points, due to a vast vocabulary and extremely quit wit. I could listen to him debate all day…

His vocabulary and recall were unbelievable. His death was a loss to the forward progress of critical thought - he obtained his real celebrity only a few short years before the cancer started taking hold.

 

[laylow]

His vocabulary and recall were unbelievable. His death was a loss to the forward progress of critical thought - he obtained his real celebrity only a few short years before the cancer started taking hold.

Indeed. He has not been replaced in that regard. I do enjoy Sam Harris and Dawkins, but they don’t hold a candle to Hitchens, especially in the entertainment portion.

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

His vocabulary and recall were unbelievable. His death was a loss to the forward progress of critical thought - he obtained his real celebrity only a few short years before the cancer started taking hold.

Indeed. He has not been replaced in that regard. I do enjoy Sam Harris and Dawkins, but they don’t hold a candle to Hitchens, especially in the entertainment portion.

That’s exactly it.

I’ve no doubt the other two are as educated - if not more so, honestly.

But he had gravitas and engaged in an entertaining way that really compelled people to listen.

 

[Start]

I thought you meant things that affect you directly.

 

[Start]

Depends on the context because sometimes it is inappropriate to use lethal force.

 

[laylow]

Depends on the context because sometimes it is inappropriate to use lethal force.

Of course. But similarly, the context also matters in regards to the stowaway.

 

[Vonsalza]

They do affect me directly. I’m grieved by suffering. So I seek to minimize it.

 

[Start]

Sometimes the aborted fetus suffers when it reaches a certain point in its development.

 

[Vonsalza]

I’m sure you’re right about that.

As Gallup identifies, most Americans are categorically against late term abortions.

 

[Sbee0]

Sbee0:

You accused me of saying something I clearly did not say. Your implied apology and admission of defeat on this is accepted, moving on.

Yes it does make one giggle but probably not for the reason you think.

Stillborn and miscarriages are not abortion, and as I’ve already said many times, perceived personhood is a non argument for abortion. And besides- what is, isn’t necessarily what should be.

For supporters of choice, it’s often the argument.

And I’m always too happy to point out how flawed that reasoning is.

I believe what you just said is called fallacy of irrelevant conclusion.

… how does it differ from a non-sequitur?

Well, your response meandered into a completely irrelevant point, completely ignoring what you were replying to. A typical tactic from the pro abortion rights argument. I think you should return your playbook, clearly you need a refund.

It is true that many women die from childbirth. There are also plenty studies out there documenting the vast number of deaths within a year after abortion,

From the CDC 700 women died in the US in 2017 from just shy of 4 million births. So 17.5 deaths per 100,000 births.
From this publication (The comparative safety of legal induced abortion and childbirth in the United States - PubMed) gives 0.6 deaths per 100,000 abortions between 1998 and 2005. Same period women suffered 8.8 deaths per 100,000 births.

Yes, I’m aware of that CDC study. What your playbook DOESN’T say however, is that the study is flawed, as the CDC has admitted that the two measurements are entirely different and essentially not comparable, like an apples and oranges comparison. It doesn’t prove squat, and it leaves out what happens after abortion, which I pointed out previously.

 

[Sbee0]

Except premise 1+2 plus your last statement doesn’t connect in any way to the right to choose abortion

Of course it does.
The fetus in utero isn’t considered “person” enough to override the agency of the mother on the matter. This is why.

And I am always too happy to point out the absurdity, the fallacy, and the danger of making yourself the authority over what is or isn’t a person.

You just don’t agree, but that doesn’t make it a non sequitur. You just don’t really know how to identify them - which you’ve displayed with some consistency.

It certainly is a non sequitur, you didn’t logically “connect the dots”. Connecting personhood with the right to choose is not logically possible, as the latter is entirely your opinion with no factual basis to it.

So now I believe you can call that…getting completely schooled.

The unborn child/fetus is doing exactly what it is programmed to do at that stage of life. It makes them no less human and no more inferior than any one of us.

But it is less a “person” which is what it’s about for pro-choicers.

See above.

It’s no surprise - the Gallup poll on it shows clearly that most Americans support 1st trimester abortion and most Americans do not support 3rd trimester abortions. They think it’s more a “person” at that time.

That’s because admittedly the narrative has been controlled by a very long time by the pro abortion rights side, and admittedly they’ve done a much better job at it. I anticipate the polls will change though, as more and more people become informed and arm themselves with facts.

A “great majority” eh?

Yup. Hitchens, before he died, have a good talk where he sourced that 97% of folks who work in academic research are either atheist or non-religious. I’m afraid I didn’t keep the source, but I believe him.

How odd. I can’t find any source from Hitchens or a third party to back that up. Very bizarre. I did however find a source (a Pew poll) where 51% of scientists polled believe in a deity. Which seems to paint a very different picture than what you were getting at, plus I am talking about scientists and your quote wasn’t. Interesting eh?

 

[Start]

Academic research might be different from regular scientists.

 

[laylow]

Like @Vonsalza, I am personally against abortion and would not advocate for one in my personal life. However, I do not believe it should be against the law.

This stance just happens to coincide with the vast majority of “Pro-choicers”

 

[Start]

That doesn’t really make sense.