Split from Economics thread - Abortion Discussions

[Tassman]

So, "Progressive Secular Humanist" says Mike Pence is a "Radical Christian Extremist". Stop the Presses. News of the Century!

Here, however, is where you and your religion of secular humanism are intellectually and morally bankrupt, Tazzy....

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progres...ian-extremist/

The fact that Pence doesn't want the murder of millions of babies, at least half of whom would turn out to be WOMEN if they weren't murdered, doesn't make him "anti-women". It makes him anti abortion.

The fact that you trumpet this lie shows what a twisted moral compass you have

[Bill the Cat]

That's exactly what abortion is, Tazzy.

[Tassman]

That's exactly what abortion is, Tazzy.

[Bill the Cat]

That doesn't mean squat when it comes to what actually happens. That they are termed differently and enforced based on the terms is completely immaterial to the practice itself.

[Cow Poke]

Where Mike Pence and his ilk are morally bankrupt is in propagating anti-science lies by refusing to accept the fact of evolution or climate change...and teaching such religion-based ignorance to innocent children.

How do you know he doesn't actually believe what he's saying? If he actually believes it, he's not lying.

Wow. And I bet you'll offer a biased source for this.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progres...ian-extremist/

And there it is.

Yeah, look at your hysteria.

No, it doesn't. That's rabid anti-Christian hysteria on your part. (see how that works?)

Well, let's see, I have a wife, two daughters, two granddaughters....

it's your "murdering of innocent babies" that warrants the hysteria, not fully adult women and their family planning.

100% of women on the planet today were, at one time, as you describe it, "insensate fetuses". That's the only source for women. To destroy the "insensate fetuses" destroys women.

[Cow Poke]

That doesn't mean squat when it comes to what actually happens. That they are termed differently and enforced based on the terms is completely immaterial to the practice itself.

They're only termed differently so liberals can "get away with murder". I think the fact that Tazzy is so passionate about this is suppressed guilt.

[Tassman]

That doesn't mean squat when it comes to what actually happens. That they are termed differently and enforced based on the terms is completely immaterial to the practice itself.

[Cow Poke]

The only hysteria here is you blowing a gasket when we talk about the murder of innocent babies. It's like your hot button.

[Cow Poke]

It's emotive nonsense, and incorrect terminology, presumably designed to heap guilt upon women already facing a difficult decision. Interesting that, typically, you project your own deficiencies onto your opponent.

We had a 3 month old baby in our Congregation on Christmas Sunday morning. It's remarkable, because the baby was born 4 months premature, and was not expected to live. While we were praying for this baby, you'd be telling the mother "oh, don't worry, it's just a insensate fetus."

Baby and mother are doing well. Father would slap your big empty head into next week.

[Tassman]

The only hysteria here is you blowing a gasket when we talk about the murder of innocent babies. It's like your hot button.

Its emotive, incorrect terminology, presumably designed to heap guilt upon women already facing a difficult decision.

[Cow Poke]

Its emotive, incorrect terminology, presumably designed to heap guilt upon women already facing a difficult decision.

Hehehe.... tried to tone down your jackassery a bit, eh? It's OK, I answered the post you tried to delete.

[Tassman]

We had a 3 month old baby in our Congregation on Christmas Sunday morning. It's remarkable, because the baby was born 4 months premature, and was not expected to live.

This typically sentimental and emotive argument has nothing to do with the abortion debate. The law states that abortions are to be restricted to the first trimester except in specific circumstances. So your 4 month premature baby was never at risk.

While we were praying for this baby, you'd be telling the mother "oh, don't worry, it's just a insensate fetus."

Baby and mother are doing well. Father would slap your big empty head into next week.

[Cow Poke]

This typically sentimental and emotive argument has nothing to do with the abortion debate. The law states that abortions are to be restricted to the first trimester except in specific circumstances. So your 4 month premature baby was never at risk.

So, on what magic day of development does the baby go from "insensate fetus" to "not at risk"? And, would that be at midnight on that day, or noon? Maybe 3 PM?

[Tassman]

So, on what magic day of development does the baby go from "insensate fetus" to "not at risk"? And, would that be at midnight on that day, or noon? Maybe 3 PM?

Certainly not before the fetus has a functioning brain and brain activity begins fairly consistently around the end of the second trimester.

BTW: There is no "magic" in naturalism, I'll leave that sort of thing to you lot.

[Cow Poke]

Certainly not before the fetus has a functioning brain and brain activity begins fairly consistently around the end of the second trimester.

BTW: There is no "magic" in naturalism, I'll leave that sort of thing to you lot.

Ah, so you're having a problem with linguistics, eh? OK, on what day of development, scientifically, does the baby transition from "insensate fetus" to "not at risk? You kinda dodged that.

Abortion stops a beating heart, Tazzy. I know it may be cliche, but it's also indisputable fact.