Iteration

@Jedi_Master_Tallyn Hold on, you just stated that a child does or should not have any rights. Yes or no, do you then believe that someone should be allowed to stab a child to death, without punishment or consequence?

@Jedi_Master_Tallyn Lol, wait, so in your view, you think someone should be allowed to stab a child to death because they should have no rights?

Ignoring the hypocritical assumption of gender here, do you have the argument as to why abortion should be legal?

@Jedi_Master_Tallyn Do you believe an unborn baby should have rights? Last chance to answer. You will be ignored subsequently if you believe you can come into a thread and try to derail it.

@Jedi_Master_Tallyn Do you believe an unborn baby should have rights?

Why should a woman have the right to choose to kill an unborn human? What is the argument for that?

Okay, so let's get clarity on this: does a woman (in your view) have the right to do anything with her body?

My last topic, if anything, demonstrated the incoherence and illogical nature of the pro choice position. Pro choicers struggled to even propose a single argument for their position and often dodged questions especially when cornered. This showcases a recurring theme of pro choicers inability to justify abortion. This thread is my attempt at actually getting to the pro choice arguments. If you have one, please post it. If you do not, do not respond to this thread.

So, does anyone have an argument for abortion, preferably in a syllogism?

@Dougie93 Do not quote me again if you are going to weasel away from the actual conversation. I am done with you.

This is exactly why I stated that the pro choice position is silly to me. These people can't even make good arguments, or any argument for that matter.

Okay, so what rights do citizens have and which rights do they not have, and what is the argument for your criteria? Secondly, do they have the right to life?

@robosmith You stated that citizenship determines whether or not someone has rights. Therefore, under your view, illegal immigrants, who are not citizens, would not have rights. Thus, you would have to commit yourself to saying it would be ethical to rape/enslave them. Where do you object, because your statements are publicly visible in this chat. What rights? Conclusions 1. Your positions entails that it is ethical to commit a holocaust against illegal immigrants. I want this addressed.

Okay, so your answer is no, what is legal currently is NOT always what should be legal. So just like you, I don't care about the current law. I don't care if slavery or marital rape are currently legal because I am only concerned with what should be legal. Do you have an argument that abortion should be legal?

@Dougie93 I am tried of you trying to dodge this question because you know you are in a corner. Is what is currently legal at a given time always what ought to be legal at a given time, YES OR NO?

@Dougie93 I am not asking you about jurisdictions or details. I am asking you, as a general rule, is what is currently legal, what ought to be legal. Your response suggests that your answer is no. Is this correct?

@Aristides Now that you are back, please answer the question that you avoided previously.

@Dougie93 Yes or no, do you believe that what is currently legal determines what ought to be legal? I will not allow you to continue to dodge the question. I want an answer, yes or no. Nothing you are saying is relevant to the question I am asking you. Answer the question.

I am tired of this dishonesty. Stop being evasive and answer the question, or concede your argument.

@Dougie93 Answer the question. Yes or no, do you believe that what is currently legal determines what ought to be legal? Stop, dodging the question just because you are in a corner. Answer the question. Yes or no?

@Dougie93 Okay, let's see if we can repeat the question here, and maybe this time you will answer it. Maybe you don't understand the question on the table. To be clear, the question is: Yes or no, do you believe that what is currently legal determines what ought to be legal? There are two possible answers to this, yes or no. I am not going to accept a continual dodge of the question, I want the answer.

@Aristides Let me see if I can repeat the question that you did not answer. You stated that personhood determines whether or not someone has rights. My question is, what determines whether or not someone is a person?

@Dougie93 Let's see if we can repeat the question because I am not sure why you are dodging it. Do you believe that what is currently legal determines what ought to be legal? Yes or no?

Okay, so let's try and repeat the question, because I am not seeing an answer. Do you believe that what is currently legal determines what ought to be legal?

Do you believe that what is legal currently determines what ought to be legal?