Iteration

First, I do not care if you change your mind or not. My goal to to argue against the pro choice view. So if you believe it is personhood that determines whether or not someone has rights, what is the standard that determines whether or not someone is a person?

I am asking about your concept of rights, so I am not sure why you are dodging the question. What determines whether or not someone should have rights?

Okay, that is fine. So presumably, you would want a society where people do not impose their views on others. Sure, I am asking for that normative ethic. You believe abortion should be legal, thus, I am asking based on this, if you believe in unborn should have rights under than view.

I don't understand why people would be so scared just to give an argument for the legality of abortion.

Okay, should an unborn child have rights, yes or no?

I am not sure why you are responding with this. I am pro-life, and yes, I believe being pro choice is silly. Do you have an argument for the pro choice position, yes or no?

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

That is fine, I just want to debate our positions and see if there are actually any good pro choice arguments. It seems as if the responses I am getting lead to insane conclusions. For example, someone above said citizenship should determine whether or not one has rights, entailing that he believes you should be able to stab all illegal immigrants to death, or even enslave them. Do you have any pro choice argument? This goes for everyone as well, or is the goal just to talk with no purpose.

Okay, so do believe an unborn child should have any rights? If you do, then you need an argument as to why they should have rights, and it should be legal to kill them at will. If you do not, you need to give a standard as to who you believe should have rights and who you believe should not.

Okay, so you believe we should be able to stab illegal immigrants to death? Yes or no?

Okay, we can work with this. Should an unborn child have any rights? If not, what is the standard that determines whether or not an individual should have rights in your view?

I should mention, I am open to hearing pro choice arguments, (preferably in syllogism). Most of them in my experience either lead to inconsistencies, or very peculiar conclusions that most would be hard pressed to accept.

I am pro-life. My essential view is that unless human rights mean something divergent to "human rights," the unborn should have them. As a consequence, I believe nearly all abortion should be banned (the typical over 99% of cases). There are potential rare exceptions which I remain agnostic on, but these do not make up the paradigm of incidents. Otherwise, I have never heard a good argument for legal abortion and I will openly argue that it ought to be banned. In summation, the pro choice position is silly to me.

Well it depends what these terms mean. Taking patriot to mean (per google) "a person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors," as a conservative, I will not declare a such a threshold of support for a country that has legalized abortion, and is moving more and more left wing socially.

That Texas pastor video is wild. I don't know what to say.

If lesbian refers to someone who commits a particular action which categorically falls under a sexual sin (homosexuality) then the answer would be yes. If lesbian refers to someone who is attracted to other women, then the answer would be no, so long as this is not an attraction that is acted upon.

This is interesting. I suspect it may be difficult to establish that it is the Democratic party that is creating these websites, but I will look through the source.

Seat belts are not an economic transaction or activity, so this seems immaterial to what has been placed forward. The don't have anything to do with the redistribution of private property.

Well, I am only slightly skeptical because I didn't see an argument presented here. I do however see it as plausible that Trump did very well, I just never properly considered the question empirically myself beyond hearing what others have said on the topic. There are a lot of factors one must consider in making such a claim.

I have not seen any evidence of socialism functioning successfully. If this is not the case, I am open to seeing such evidence, but I am yet to in my experience.