Quote:
Originally Posted by General AI  So your argument is that its a growing living being.
Not a very convincing argument is it? |
No, not quite. My argument is that it's a growing, living being, and therefore, abortion of this growing, living being would be considered murder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by General AI 1. You should really cut the patronizing attitude you've got here. It wont do.
2. My point doesn't disapprove anything, but it addresses your point that the mother shouldn't have the right to have an abortion because its "murder". Why should anyone but the mother (or the father) decide whether or not she can have an abortion?
|
1. I like the attitude I have here. It actually helps me better put my post. Ty, for the hint, though.
2. I realize that noone but the mother/father should have rightful control over whether the fetus is aborted, but that doesn't change the fact that to me, it's wrong. I mean, any debater could ask a question, only to be stalemated by the same, opposite question. That's basically what you're doing. However, while I realize this, I also realize that the way I see it, it's murder, it's wrong, and it's inhuman. I could tell an almost-mother that abortion is wrong, but that doesn't mean she'll listen. I understand your point, but I already have a steady point of my own. :]
Quote:
Originally Posted by General AI
And your entire argument that it's murder is flawed on 2 different levels.
1) You're argument is that getting rid of some cells and tissue is technically murder, and is therefore unlawful and immoral. You're basically using technicalities to give abortion a title which would it illegitimate. It's a common argument used by many anti-abortionists to justify their belief.
2) It's actually not murder at all.
Mur-der - the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. (I'm guessing you cut out most of your definition to better back your argument)
As I've said during the time before the first trimester, the cells and tissue aren't even human yet (or conscious).
|
1. No, I do believe that you've misunderstood me, mister General. My argument is that shutting off all cell activity would indeed shut off the entire units life force. When a fetus is aborted, ALL of it's cells are shut off and rendered incapable of any other reproduction/activity. Is this arguable to you?
2. Well, that's pretty much an opinion, unless you can prove otherwise. No, I actually didn't leave out any of my definition. If you actually looked, those are two, not completely, but different definitions. I never argued that the cells and tissues of a fetus were human, but they ARE alive, which would make abortion murder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by General AI In your original post I believed you were clearly referring to people, and I don't think the human body count has reached trillions yet (we weren't always here).
Fixed. |
Yes, I actually was referring to people. Please, though, prove to me that the human body count has not reached trillion. If you can, I'll admit defeat .. For this argument. Tyvm, captain. :]