The horrors of abortion which our governments support

[ExFlyer]

20 minutes ago, User said:

Other than the last 2 pages of my being called a liar over and over again... sure. 

Yeah well, on this forum everyone is a liar unless you agree with everything others say. It has no meaning anymore.

Still, kudos for you rdebate.

Edited August 11, 2024 by ExFlyer

[Guest]

4 hours ago, blackbird said:

The idea that they are not human or less than human

Nobody is saying they are less than human. They are clearly human. Medically however, it is deemed both safer and acceptable to terminate the pregnancy when the baby is not yet fully developed. 

I fail to see the issue, should this be the woman's choice, based on logic. Not religious belief.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, User said:

Clearly you do not

You have yet to provide anything regarding cites or evidence to support your stance. Yours is purely opinion.

2 hours ago, User said:

have to run away. 

Kind of like what you were doing through deflection, lies and deceptive debate tactics. Shameful. 

2 hours ago, User said:

Other than the last 2 pages

What about the first 7, of you lying?

[User]

25 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Nobody is saying they are less than human.

You are certainly saying they are not human life enough to deserve any right to life. 

26 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

I fail to see the issue, should this be the woman's choice, based on logic. Not religious belief.

Except... you don't really believe it should be her choice the whole pregnancy... or do you think the woman should be free to choose an abortion up to the moment of birth for any reason?

 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, User said:

You are certainly saying

Heh. Easy to debate, when you don't have to be honest. Apparently, you can school a poster at will without having a sound debate, when you get to say so.

7 minutes ago, User said:

the whole pregnancy

Prior to 25 weeks.

Now, I will grab popcorn and watch you contort that to me saying I feel all babies should be murdered to cut down on the price of meat.

[User]

7 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Heh. Easy to debate, when you don't have to be honest. Apparently, you can school a poster at will without having a sound debate, when you get to say so.

What is the lie here? Your entire argument is that the unborn child has no right to life. Notice, you didn't actually address this point. Go on, lets see you engage directly. If you can. 

8 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Prior to 25 weeks.

Now, I will grab popcorn and watch you contort that to me saying I feel all babies should be murdered to cut down on the price of meat.

Oh, so you don't think a woman has a right to choose after all. You want to restrict and limit their rights too. 

 

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Nobody is saying they are less than human. They are clearly human. Medically however, it is deemed both safer and acceptable to terminate the pregnancy when the baby is not yet fully developed. 

I fail to see the issue, should this be the woman's choice, based on logic. Not religious belief.

That's because you and a few others on here have no moral compass or concern for what is right or wrong. When you reject God and the Bible, you have rejected your only hope.  You are now in total darkness.  The Devil has a strong grip on you.  Unless you get down on your knees and beg God for forgiveness and pay attention to his word, I don't think there is anything anybody can say.

Edited August 11, 2024 by blackbird

[Guest]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

That's because you and a few others on here have no moral compass or concern for what is right or wrong.

Whats right, and whats wrong, to you. You have yet to support with any data, logically what actually made this wrong, other than emotional opinions. Sensationalism, and exaggerations devoid of facts, or context that is remotely close to being objective in nature. 

You're literally sounding more like PETA, than anything else.

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

You are now in total darkness.  

Your worldview is so narrow, that the irony of that statement, is baffling.

A Bible and church doesn't make you a better human. Unless this is what you're saying.

Like I said. Canada is better off, thinkers like you, aren't responsible for women's rights.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, User said:

What is the lie here?

I said lies. You have a bit of a track record at this point. O_o

2 hours ago, User said:

Oh, so you don't think a woman has a right to choose after all.

You're just trolling at this point, haha.

[User]

46 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

You're just trolling at this point, haha.

Yet again, you have to run away. 

 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, User said:

Yet again, you have to run away. 

Heh, you lie again. You should consider becoming a used car salesman. Not debating on here.

Still haven't refuted my initial arguments, lie about me running can't pick apart my arguments unless you gaslight, invent, sensationalized and of course...wait for it...lie your pants off so hard, they called the police for indecent exposure on you, online no less.

[User]

1 minute ago, Perspektiv said:

Heh, you lie again. You should consider becoming a used car salesman. Not debating on here.

Still haven't refuted my initial arguments, lie about me running can't pick apart my arguments unless you gaslight, invent, sensationalized and of course...wait for it...lie your pants off so hard, they called the police for indecent exposure on you, online no less.

No lie. Here, lets try again:

Oh, so you don't think a woman has a right to choose after all. You want to restrict and limit their rights too. 

You sit on here preaching about a woman right to choose and being glad folks like Blackbird are not in charge, but the only difference between the two of you is 24 weeks. Your positions have no logical sense which is why you can't defend them and avoid my points and questions. 

This is your position:

WOMANS RIGHT TO REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH!!!!!!                    OOPS, NOT RIGHT NOW

Pregnant---------------------------------------------- 24 weeks -------------------Birth

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, User said:

No lie.

 You literally lied about what I said or insinuated as such. 

1 hour ago, User said:

Here, lets try again

So, translation: "okay, let me save face, from my lying..."

1 hour ago, User said:

WOMANS RIGHT TO REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH!!!!!!                    OOPS, NOT RIGHT NOW

More like the right to an abortion.

You have standards when you drive a car, does this mean you don't have the right because of the restrictions? Medical standards are akin to revoking rights? 

You're flailing. Trying to insinuate, lie and sensationalize.

My logic is fine. You can't gaslight hard enough to make the smelly stuff you're peddling be a good argument.

[User]

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

You literally lied about what I said or insinuated as such. 

What was the lie?

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

So, translation: "okay, let me save face, from my lying..."

What lie?

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

More like the right to an abortion.

You have standards when you drive a car, does this mean you don't have the right because of the restrictions? Medical standards are akin to revoking rights? 

You're flailing. Trying to insinuate, lie and sensationalize.

My logic is fine. You can't gaslight hard enough to make the smelly stuff you're peddling be a good argument.

No lie here. Your position is no different than ours. You don't think women have a right to their body, to their reproductive functions... the only difference is you draw the line at 24 weeks, we draw the line at conception. 

You want to control women just like we do. All your arguments are just absurd nonsense you are guilty of doing yourself. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, User said:

What was the lie?

The lies. 

5 minutes ago, User said:

Your position is no different than ours

Lie # 34. 

6 minutes ago, User said:

You don't think women have a right to their body

That makes no sense.

6 minutes ago, User said:

You want to control women just like we do.

Projecting. Plus lying. 

7 minutes ago, User said:

we draw the line at conception. 

So, no abortion. No reproductive rights. You're lazy at debating, plus very dishonest.

[User]

2 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

So, no abortion. No reproductive rights. You're lazy at debating, plus very dishonest.

Week 24, then you say no abortion, no reproductive rights. (Nevermind the stupidity of your arbitrarily saying 24) Why 24 weeks?

There is nothing dishonest about calling out the absurdity of your arguments here. 

 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, User said:

There is nothing dishonest

You're pro life. Am pro choice. I presented my opinion with cites. You chose to present yours via lies and sensationalism. Thats the dishonest part.

[User]

4 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

You're pro life. Am pro choice. I presented my opinion with cites. You chose to present yours via lies and sensationalism. Thats the dishonest part.

You are not Pro-Choice after your arbitrary 24 weeks. 

There is nothing dishonest about calling your bad arguments out. 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, User said:

You are not Pro-Choice

I sure am. No amount of gaslighting from you will change that.

6 hours ago, User said:

There is nothing dishonest

You are fully dishonest in debate, because your points wouldn't stand without sensationalism. Without lying and gaslighting.

[blackbird]

13 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Whats right, and whats wrong, to you. You have yet to support with any data, logically what actually made this wrong, other than emotional opinions.

No, I'm afraid you are totally deceived by the master of deception of this world.

What is right or wrong is not determined by "data" from some abortion activists somewhere or some liberal progressive.

I realize you hate to admit it, but you are deeply deceived and the deception is engrained in your thinking,

Right and wrong comes from God and his written revelation which you and a few others here want to deny because of your deception.

If you disagree with this, maybe you can explain what is the basis of right and wrong and where does it come from in your view?

Edited August 12, 2024 by blackbird

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, blackbird said:

What is right or wrong is not determined by "data"

Sure it is. Data is how we can assess where we are going wrong, and knowingly administer incremental corrections, and grow from it.

It is also how we can keep track of progress or whether further adjustments need to be made.

You feeling abortion is wrong, is an opinion. Me supporting a woman's right to choose, is an opinion.

Data supports your opinion, or doesn't.

God is not a good measuring stick for womens reproductive rights. For womens rights, in general.

In fact, he has a horrible track record in the developing world, in people who strongly believe, vs STD contraction, overwhelming of orphanages and adoption centers, along with the many other issues that come along with your belief.

You know, supported with actual data. Using God only, and refusing to question anything, is not a good thing. Especially when it comes down to medical care.

14 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I realize you hate to admit it, but you are deeply deceived and the deception is engrained in your thinking

Deceived by what? Siding with the fact that women should have reproductive rights? Rights in general?

14 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Right and wrong comes from God

I disagree. You're essentially telling me that unless I read a Bible or go to church, that I won't know how to be a decent human being. To be able to tell that running someone over with my car is wrong. That shoplifting, is wrong. Etc.

That people who go to church can do no wrong. Cannot sin.

If thats not what you're saying, then what logical point are you trying to make?

17 minutes ago, blackbird said:

If you disagree with this

I do.

God isn't as effective, as a robust legal system and standards of living that will have a better means at predicting behavior.

Answering every question with God, removes the ability to freely think. 

A free society should encourage free thought.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, User said:

calling your bad arguments out. 

You can't even support your bad arguments with any data or have them stand without sensationalism and histrionics, to begin with.

Killing a 5 year old after numbing them, is exactly the same as killing an undeveloped fetus that cannot feel pain up to a certain point. Thats what you are calling a great counter argument. There is no difference. Heck, I hung out with my 4 year old fetus nephew, yesterday. O_o

That unless she can abort 9 months in, then you don't support her freedom to choose, because she has no choice. Another bit of your wise words.

Where is it that you pick my argument apart, without lies,  putting words in my mouth and sensationalism?

Your idea of bad logic, is you replacing it with horrible logic.

If you're an engineer, you are the Pisa tower designer, of debating.

Your points, stripped of histrionics and lies, stand just about as straight.

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

What is right or wrong is not determined by "data"

Sure it is. Data is how we can assess where we are going wrong, and knowingly administer incremental corrections, and grow from it.

No,  we are talking about morality.  Right and wrong is not determined by data whatever that is.  First of all what do you mean by data?  How would that guide one in what is right and wrong?  It wouldn't and it can't because right and wrong has nothing to do with numbers or statistics.

 

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

You feeling abortion is wrong, is an opinion. Me supporting a woman's right to choose, is an opinion.

What is an opinion?  That sounds like something that is pulled out of thin air.  .My belief is based on the infallible foundation of God's inerrant word, in English, the King James Bible.   What is your belief based on?

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Deceived by what? Siding with the fact that women should have reproductive rights? Rights in general?

Again, you are pulling something out of thin air.  What does "rights" mean?  When you say "reproductive rights", that sounds kind of innocent all right, but why don't you tell the truth?  You mean "the right to kill one's baby".   

All morality or what is right or wrong has to have a historical base or foundation from which it comes from.  It is well-established in western civilization that certain things are wrong.  Examples could be stealing, murder,  etc.

Western civilization has a certain view of human rights too that were largely influenced by respect for other people and the Biblical principle of love thy neighbour.  That relates to respect for human life above all.  Those are Biblical principles that are enshrined in many laws.  

Did you grow up in a modern western country that had a lot of long-held Judeo-Christian beliefs or did you come from a kind of heathen country that did not?  That could have affected your thinking from a young age.  Roman Catholicism does not elevate the Bible as being God's infallible final authority.  As a result some countries that are largely Roman Catholic have weaker morals in a lot of areas.  Islamic countries also have different beliefs that often conflict with Judeo-Christian belief systems.

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

I disagree. You're essentially telling me that unless I read a Bible or go to church, that I won't know how to be a decent human being. To be able to tell that running someone over with my car is wrong. That shoplifting, is wrong. Etc.

That people who go to church can do no wrong. Cannot sin.

If thats not what you're saying, then what logical point are you trying to make?

No, I am saying if you don't believe in God, the Bible, and west's historic Judeo-Christian values of the sanctity of life, you are of course not going to understand what this is all about.

I never said if one goes to church, he can do no wrong.  You don't understand what Christianity, the Bible is all about.  Church is not a place where one can do no wrong.  Church is a place of fellowship for like-minded people who believe in Jesus Christ.  It doesn't mean that people who go there are perfect and they don't consider themselves as better than anyone else.  Believers in Jesus Christ believe what the Bible teaches and are trying to learn more about it and grow in their faith.  Not everyone that goes is necessarily there for the right reasons.  We live in an imperfect world.

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

God isn't as effective, as a robust legal system and standards of living that will have a better means at predicting behavior.

Answering every question with God, removes the ability to freely think. 

A free society should encourage free thought.

You defined liberalism or secular humanism.  That means everyone is free to do their own thing.  That is the problem with society today.

They have no moral guide or they follow people or ideas that man invented that are immoral and contrary to what is right.

What you don't understand is that human beings are innately corrupt, or fallen beings.  Their mental abilities often lead them down the wrong path.  That is why there is so much evil in the world.  You can google secular humanism and find out what it is all about.  But the Bible teaches the human heart is fundamentally evil and on it's own is not capable of doing the right thing.  That is where you err greatly.  You think man on his own is better off.  History shows you are wrong.

[User]

6 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

I sure am. No amount of gaslighting from you will change that.

I am Pro-Choice too then!

LOL

6 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

You are fully dishonest in debate, because your points wouldn't stand without sensationalism. Without lying and gaslighting.

Why do you run from responding directly to most of my comments? Even now, you chop them off and just make baseless assertions about lying. 

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Killing a 5 year old after numbing them, is exactly the same as killing an undeveloped fetus that cannot feel pain up to a certain point. Thats what you are calling a great counter argument. There is no difference. Heck, I hung out with my 4 year old fetus nephew, yesterday. O_o

When it comes to YOUR bad argument about pain not being felt by an unborn child in your justification for killing them, the point was that you can make a 5 year old not feel pain too... 

Pain being a determining factor in the unborn child being a human life with any right to life is not a good argument.

Also, yes, you can certainly hang out with unborn children. You claim to be a parent... were you unaware of your being around your own unborn children?

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

That unless she can abort 9 months in, then you don't support her freedom to choose, because she has no choice. Another bit of your wise words.

She had a choice, unless she was raped, at many points BEFORE creating a human life. 

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Where is it that you pick my argument apart, without lies,  putting words in my mouth and sensationalism?

Just did it again. 

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, blackbird said:

No,  we are talking about morality. 

Morality is not a good metric to measure women's rights.

Its subjective, vs accurate based on available data.

23 minutes ago, blackbird said:

First of all what do you mean by data? 

How is abortion wrong, using anything but religion and morality? 

How do you measure this? How is it benefiting women to be forced to give birth? Morality? God? How do you measure such metrics?

Data is best, because you can measure metrics, and adjust them based on actual knowledge. 

26 minutes ago, blackbird said:

What is your belief based on?

Am non religious, as previously stated.

So, you're telling me your belief in God, and anyone believing in God are superior human beings and more morally sound, correct?

How so? How can you quantify this?

Its just opinion based.

27 minutes ago, blackbird said:

You mean "the right to kill one's baby".   

Sure, word it as you wish. It doesn't take away from the fact a woman should have the right to do so, within the framing of the law, if her reproductive rights are to be respected.

29 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Church is not a place where one can do no wrong.  

So how is this the best means of dictating what is medically right or wrong by medical standards? Medical standards sort of have to be right, based on trial and error. Data.

31 minutes ago, blackbird said:

We live in an imperfect world.

Which is why we should have laws, medical standards. Not bibles, dictating what a woman can do with her body regarding reproductive rights. Not God.

31 minutes ago, User said:

I am Pro-Choice too 

Glad we agree on a woman's right to choose. 

32 minutes ago, User said:

Just did it again. 

I think they're is just you patting yourself on the back. Lying, of course.