Something we can all agree on is that abortion causes death. "Pro-choice" people evade that fact by claiming that the entity that is dying is not, in fact, a human being but something else. This, of course, means that "pro-choice" people are liars, and mostly they are lying to themselves so they don't have to admit they are murderers. I propose we alter the debate by disposing of the inane term "pro-choice" and call a spade a spade. People who believe in legalized abortion are "pro-death." They are advocating for death. They serve the angel of death. They are death's most loyal servants.
You are the liar if you claim for a fact that the entity dying is a human being. That has never been established. Empirical evidence shows that illegal abortion causes more deaths than legal abortion, so who is pro-death? And who is anti-woman?
It actually has. Legally at least. Fetal homicide laws and the Federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act all clearly show this. Why is being anti killer "anti woman"? Why should we go to great lengaths to protect the killer while considering the victim a nothing?
Of a fetus. Your inability to grasp reality does not negate what a fetus is or makes it something else. The need to label people because of lack of intelligent argumetns is the result of willful ignorance, being uninformed or a religious zealot who is unable to think for himself. See above. I propose that people who lack intellectual skills, not undertake debate, an act that by definition must rely on intellect. People who must label others do so out of stupidity or willful ignorance. Only morons think that. Religious not cases have no place in intelligent discourse.
No it still has not, and the future does not look any better. Of course yo must keep repeating this fallacy because you are unable to show any support for it. Not even that. If a fetus was legally recognized it would be so for ANY and ALL CIRCUMSTANCES. Only to those incapable to understand them. Because of ignorance in the face of repeatedly being show what reality is, you keep ignoring it. Because it is a nothing and as such not a victim.
Well this is a typical incoherent rant from you, but I have already posted actual law references and quotes from the actual language of the law, so You are wrong, as usual.
You keep posting the same irrelevant links that you are still unable or unwilling to understand. In that respect no one can help you, but you can. Ask someone to explain them to you.
I already refer to them as such. Since they routinely refer to us as "anti-choice" it only seems fair to refer to them as pro-death or anti-life. Turnabout is fair play.
"They did it first," sounds a lttle childish. Especially when you ignore the fact that abortion rates are about the same whether it is legal or not, and illegal abortion causes more maternal deaths. Furthermore, abortion rates are lower where there is affordable contraception and sex education (such as Planned Parenthood provides) are available. So if lower abortion rates are important to you, you can either support policies that accomplish that, or you can engage in name calling and insults.
but we HAVE Planned Parenthood and you claim that abortion rates are still the same. so obviously Planned Parenthood is a failure.
I'm adamantly Pro-Choice, Pro-Capital Punishment, Pro-Euthanasia, and Pro-Gun Rights. You can call me what you will, but I say that I am Pro-Reason and Pro-Survival-of-the-Human-Race.
Who's calling names? I'm simply reframing the dialogue. If you support the killing of children, that technically makes you pro-death or anti-life. That's not an insult. It just is what it is. Calling them jerks would be name calling. And while they might be that too, that is not what I am calling them here.
Obviously you thought it was offensive to pro-choicers and justified as "turnabout." Call it what you want. It doesn't add to the debate, and it doesn't reduce the number of abortions. Just to be clear, is that your goal or isn't it? Just to clarify... When say "support the killing of children," which of the following meanings apply to your context? child   /tʃaɪld/ Show Spelled[chahyld] Show IPA noun, plural chil·dren. 1. a person between birth and full growth; a boy or girl: books for children. 2. a son or daughter: All my children are married. 3. a baby or infant. 4. a human fetus. 5. a childish person: He's such a child about money. Pro-choicers do not support the "killing of" a person between birth and full growth, or a son or daughter, a baby or infant, or a childish person. We support the right of a woman to choose whether or not be pregnant. Most abortions are performed during the embryonic stage, which doesn't involve a fetus. The entire point of the thread is be offensive. At least be honest about that.
It just goes to show what yo bring to the debate. You are "re-framing the dialogue" so you can label one side. I guess arguments that address the real issue are not in your scope or capacity then.
So, if it's not a "human" being, what type of "being" is it? "Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being - a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings." --Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981, 7. "After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion...it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception." --Dr. Jerome Lejune, professor of genetics at the University of Descartes in Paris, discovered the chromosome pattern of Down's syndrome, "Father of Modern Genetics," "...I accept what is biologically manifest—that human life commences at the time of conception."--Dr. Landrum Shettles, attending obstetrician-gynecologist at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York for thirty years, discovered female producing sperm "Father of In-Vitro Fertilization" "By all criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception." Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic. "The basic fact is simple: life begins not at birth, but conception" -- Ashley Montague, pro-choice geneticist, professor at Harvard and Rutgers "A Human fetus is a non -human animal; it is a stage of human being." --Wayne Sumner, prochoice philosopher, leader, and author, in Abortion and Moral Theory. "Conceived of human parents, zygotes, embryo, and fetuses are human" --Peter Singer, prochoice philosopher known for extending prochoice arguments to advocate legalized infanticide. "A new individual is created when the elements of a potent sperm merge with those of a fertile ovum, or egg." -- Encyclopedia Britannica, "Pregnancy," page 968, 15th Edition. Chicago 1974 "Each human begins life as a combination of two cells, a female ovum and a much smaller male sperm."-- Clark, J. ed., The Nervous System: Circuits of Communication in the Human Body, Torstar Books Inc., Toronto, 1985, page 99 "Biologically speaking, human development begins at fertilization." -- The Biology of Prenatal Develpment, National Geographic, 2006.