The group of people that I simply cant understand

Then obviously you've never known (or think you've never known) women who have had abortions. They are not criminals nor are they "bad".

Now, since you think everyone in history who has killed is bad then do you think our troops are bad?

Do you think that those who killed in our American Revolution that formed a country for YOU were bad?

Do you think those who slaughtered native Americans and settled this country are bad?

Wars have killed millions of innocent people.


Do you think people who defend their lives and homes from intruders by killing the intruder are bad?

 

Which simply translates into you have nothing. Can I drive a vehicle without risk of being arrested for not wearing a seat belt? How about a motorcycle helmet? (depending on the state for sure). How about drunk driving? In all of those cases, government has dictated to me that either the state of, or the protection of my body are reasonable. right? Can I then enforce a government regulation that tells women that they must wear a helmet or abstain from drinking while pregnant?

Ill remind you that the abortion movement was created entirely for the edification of Eugenics. I'll crib it for you. Fear of the "other" because isn't liberal elitism the thing that ultimately must be protected?

 

NO one can force you to use your body, or any part of it, to sustain the life of another.
You cannot be forced to say, give someone your blood or heart to keep them alive.
Pregnant women are also protected from having that right taken away.


Abortion was NOT created in the 20th century just because women were finally protected at that time.......it has been around for thousands of years.... NO one knows who "invented" it.

 

This seems both contradictory, and tortured. If, as you suggest, a woman cannot be forced to sustain life for another why do we give them child support? If I'm the duly divorced father, aren't I obligated to use my body to sustain the life of another? So answer the original question, can government make you protect your body, including that of the unborn within you? If not, why can we accept the use of seatbelts, or helmets?

 

You don't seem to be understanding about a person using their body to sustain the life of another.


Children get child support because they are BORN, they are NOT physically attached to another person or using another's body PHYSICALLY to sustain their life.

Father's are NOT forced to give a kidney nor blood nor their circulatory system to support their children.

A fetus uses another's body to sustain it's life...something NO one else can do.

.

 

A scream into the sky still doesn't make you credible. Government still makes me protect my body. Do they not? I understand you will likely never be able to defend the contradiction here. Suffice it to say that you tried.

 

Faith without works is dead. - James 2:17

From the actual Bible.

 

A fetus is placed in that position by the actions of the host. So the host should then be allowed to intentionally kill the guest human being at will?

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
You don't seem to be understanding about a person using their body to sustain the life of another.
Children get child support because they are BORN, they are NOT physically attached to another person or using another's body PHYSICALLY to sustain their life.
Father's are NOT forced to give a kidney nor blood nor their circulatory system to support their children.
A fetus uses another's body to sustain it's life...something NO one else can do
.

There is no contradiction.

You would've pointed it out if there had been.

 

Denial is not an effective debate position!

 

No fetus is "paced' anywhere, a woman either becomes pregnant or she doesn't....she does not "place" the fetus inside herself.

Even if a person invites another into their home that is not consent to steal them blind or beat them up. Consent may be withdrawn at anytime and the other thrown out.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
FoxHastings said: ↑
You don't seem to be understanding about a person using their body to sustain the life of another.
Children get child support because they are BORN, they are NOT physically attached to another person or using another's body PHYSICALLY to sustain their life.
Father's are NOT forced to give a kidney nor blood nor their circulatory system to support their children.
A fetus uses another's body to sustain it's life...something NO one else can do
.






There is no contradiction.

You would've pointed it out if there had been.

Not being able to address a post one quotes is not a debate position at all.

 

Then according to Yabber, those people are not Christian.
But if you think they are Christian, Thx. That is what I've been telling him. There are many different beliefs among Christians.
Helping me make my point.

 

FYI - Nothing but sperm was placed into the host.
The sperm fertilized the egg. Incubation then takes place and begins to develop.
Can't believe you don't know how a pregnancy happens.

No one opened the future mother up and placed a fetus insider her.

 

I have already decimated all 10 of the silly notions you cycle through as you are getting shot down.

 

But they all should be based on the Bible, or they shouldn’t call themselves Christian

 

She created the fetus through her own actions. Are you seriously disputing that fact??

You seem the be the one unaware of how pregnancies occur!

 

How can you shoot down anything when you never address what is posted?

 

I have addressed your nonsense ad nauseum! I don’t feel the need to repeat myself.

 

1. Created is not placed as you said
2. She did not create that fetus on her own.
3. How did my telling you a fetus is NOT placed in the uterus make you think anything was disputed? Did I not say sperm was placed, not a fetus?
4. You claimed a fetus was placed inside the host. I said sperm was placed inside the host. Who do you think knows how pregnancies occur?

 

Actually both fit the situation. You want to play semantics, have fun with that.

 

When presented with facts they will accuse you of "playing semantics"....

 

It's not semantics, it's the definitions.
You want to play with words to make a point that is non existent, get called on it. Making crap up does not mean you have a point. In fact, just the opposite.

 

Yeah calling out people who claim a homicide is just a mundane doctors office visit is just an unworthy pursuit I guess in your mind. The point is relevant! An abortion is s homicide and should be treated as such.

 

Nope, calling out some fake BS about a fetus being planted in the host.