Abolitionist Society of Oklahoma said...
"Madman said, 'In other words, yeah, it does practices breathing to prepare for the time when it would need to.'
"So, in other words, you are telling me that I am right. Weird.
"Quick question: What is my twitter name?
"And, I'm not sure, but did you just argue that if a human has an umbilical cord they can be dismembered if somebody else chooses to kill them?
"That's not really science, philosophy, or theology.
"And, I don't know if it is a great idea to define whether a human has a right to stay alive based on whether they would stay alive if you violently or non violently extracted them from their environment. That ain't cool man.
"But you aren't serious. If a premie were born at 20 weeks today and you held him or her in your arms tomorrow, you wouldn't change any of your views. Your views are based on your desired end.
"Your comments here are text book representations of standard atheistic/agnostic rationalization techniques of rhetoric over reason.
I'm going out on a day long study date away from this blog. But I promise to deal with your vitriol sometime tonight after I get back home."
Right about what? If you consider 30% correct right. Of course, you could take it 70% further with pure bullshit and arrogance.
NormanAbolition would be your twitter name, I thought. He's the one who linked to this. Am I mistaken? Did one of your cohorts lead me here? He's either your sock, he's imitating you, or deliberately trying to confuse people.
No, I didn't give having an umbilical cord as a reason that a fetus should be aborted, or a reason why a mother should be allowed to abort it. Umbilical cords aren't that offensive. Are you just taking words I wrote, jumbling them and than grabbing for any absurd combination you can to make a counterargument? No, an umbilical cord is not a reason to kill a fetus. Sorry you wasted perfectly good moral outrage on that one.
However, a person doesn't live in a womb. If you take a fetus out of the womb, it dies, if you put a baby into the womb, it dies. The two animals inhabit utterly different environments. Unlike a frog and a tadpole, which are basically as side by side as dogs and puppies.
BTW, referring to your previous post, a tadpole doesn't have an umbilical cord either, but you need to compare frogs to frog embryos, not to tadpoles to make any kind of accurate analogy. A human being is to fetus as frog is to frog embryo, not a tadpole. That kid probably wouldn't have felt so appalled at killing frog eggs, which he could hardly see. That is, until you brought home the utter evil of it to him.
My views aren't based on desired ends you arrogant, presumptuous, asshole. As a male, I'll never need an abortion, and for medical reasons, I've never been obligated to pay for one, and there's a zero chance I'll ever impregnate anyone. So, what the hell are these "desired ends?" I guess if you can't come up with anything whatsoever, possession by Satan himself might be your fallback, but I warn you, it's idiotic.
Meanwhile, I say you're antichoice because it's an adventure in a Bible fantasy world that makes you happy, where there's good vs. evil, and you feel like a champion fighting evil. To me, that means your conclusions are based on a desired end, informed by the Bible, your favorite work of fiction, and with the social support of fellow Bible fans who are always telling you how moral and unquestionably good you are for doing it. Who could question such a motive as saving babies- -before they even exist. That's initiative.
I will say though, that not nearly every prochoice person shares my views and my philosophical underpinnings on the matter. They don't hold their opinions about discretionary abortion due to their religious views or lack of them. So, I ask you, knowing the answer will be no, don't stereotype this as "the standard atheistic/agnostic rationalization techniques. . . ." If you do, you'll be unpleasantly surprised.
My anti-religious views are not shared by most prochoicers. I just have some very negative views on cults, and Christianity is a cult as much as Scientology. Once you break from Christianity, and you've had time to de-program, the entire cult looks every bit as absurd as Scientology. If you're offended by that comparison, I think the Scientologists are, too.
"Once you break from Christianity, and you've had time to de-program, the entire cult looks every bit as absurd as Scientology. If you're offended by that comparison, I think the Scientologists are, too. "
ReplyDeleteWell said!