S
sedonaman
Guest
Ending an innocent human life. Isn’t that attempted justification what generated the assertion that a fetus is not a human person, and from that the topic of this thread?
- Status
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
J
jmcrae
Guest
I thought it was perfectly clear what he was referring to.That was really clear from your post
I don’t think that was an “argument” - that was more of a “statement of the obvious.”
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
Not a statement of the obvious at all.I thought it was perfectly clear what he was referring to.
I don’t think that was an “argument” - that was more of a “statement of the obvious.”
Amazing how certain people on this site see what they want to see, isn’t it?
S
sedonaman
Guest
See what I mean about semantic gymnastics? You don’t even know what a circular argument is.That was really clear from your post
Circular argument sedonaman.
Apparently you are unaware that the pro-abortion arguments are all worn-out. Having been used to justify slavery, they are not even new. All the pro-life side needs to make its case is what California Medicine had to say in its 1970 pro-abortion advice on how to dehumanize the vulnerable in order to sell a gullible public. If you are not part of that conspiracy, it’s too bad you fell for its propaganda. As I recall, you were the one who criticized another poster for not being able to think for himself.
J
jmcrae
Guest
It is not possible to waken those who are only pretending to be asleep, and there are none so blind as those who will not see.
From the moment of conception, everything that that child will be, (sex, hair colour, skin colour, eye colour, and animate, rational soul) already is. Science is on our side, for that one - the zygote already has all of its DNA, and it is already moving around purposefully and independently. There is nothing “potential” other than the actual growth and aging process, and even this is already under way, right from the first cell division.
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
LOL Sedonaman…
all these words to say nothing!
The pro-choice arguments are not all worn-out, as anyone who has studied moral philosophy would know! Conspiracy, propaganda - easy words to throw around and nothing to with persuasion or formal argument.
I certainly think for myself. Do you?
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
Goodness, what a collection of hackneyed cliches!
Zygote moves independently? Whose science is this? L Ron Hubbard’s?
J
jmcrae
Guest
Yes - the zygote seeks out the womb, and moves in that direction, because it (she or he, actually) knows that that’s where the food is.
S
sedonaman
Guest
Argument from omniscience.
…
Then why do you use worn out arguments that have already been shot down by your own side, like California Medicine? Why do you use logical fallacies like the one above?
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
Nonsensical post, please don’t offended if I don’t respond
“own side”?
I think you need to stop seeing what you want to see
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
Could you tell me how the zygote propels itself?Yes - the zygote seeks out the womb, and moves in that direction, because it (she or he, actually) knows that that’s where the food is.
J
jmcrae
Guest
You’ve been arguing the pro-abortion side ever since you arrived on this site - no one is saying that you are pro-abortion, but that’s the side that you keep on arguing from, for whatever reason - so, yeah - “own side.”Nonsensical post, please don’t offended if I don’t respond
“own side”?
I think that if you want to be perceived as “pro-life,” that you should stop arguing from the pro-abortion point of view.
J
jmcrae
Guest
It swims.
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
So what does it use for propulsion? I have arms and legs to swim with, what does the zygote swim with?It swims.
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
I haven’t actually ever argued for the pro-abortion side, I’ve had to state and restate my position dozens of times tho. As much good as it does.You’ve been arguing the pro-abortion side ever since you arrived on this site - no one is saying that you are pro-abortion, but that’s the side that you keep on arguing from, for whatever reason - so, yeah - “own side.”
I think that if you want to be perceived as “pro-life,” that you should stop arguing from the pro-abortion point of view.
A lot of people seem to resent having certain assumptions challenged tho.
J
jmcrae
Guest
I’m not a doctor; I don’t know for certain. However, it seems reasonable that prior to cell division, it probably propels itself the same way a protozoan or any other single-celled animal would, by shifting its central mass in the direction that it wants to go. That condition only lasts a few moments though - after cell division has begun, it could use its spine as a kind of “tail” and propel itself with that. Keep in mind, by the time it arrives at the womb, cell differentiation has already begun.
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
The zygote doesn’t propel itself, the ovum/zygote if outside the salpinx is swept in by the fimbriae, and inside the salpinx by the cilia.I’m not a doctor; I don’t know for certain. However, it seems reasonable that prior to cell division, it probably propels itself the same way a protozoan or any other single-celled animal would, by shifting its central mass in the direction that it wants to go. That condition only lasts a few moments though - after cell division has begun, it could use its spine as a kind of “tail” and propel itself with that. Keep in mind, by the time it arrives at the womb, cell differentiation has already begun.
S
St_Francis
Guest
I have yet to see you present an argument that is not pro-abortion (which I suppose will bring up that other hackneyed argument that “pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion”)
The only position I have seen you state is that you are for abortion when the mother’s life is in danger.
Not really. They just get tired of being insulted.
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
Not an argument actually.
Are you deliberately missing out the rest of the statement?
…whilst being ready to insult others happily?
- Status