Thread: Any lifer got the guts to debate me?

Originally Posted by Giftedone

The zygote "might" create something that equal's a human being so long nothing happens along the way but, the zygote is not a human being and nor does it equal one.

A human zygote is specifically designed to create a HUMAN BEING through the process of mitosis. Will you please stop with the 'human being' BS? How many times do I have to educate you? A zygote is a DEVELOPING human life.

A heart cell "might" create a heart heart in the future but a heart cell is not a heart.

A heart cell is not a zygote, the thread is not about hearts.

A zygote will "never" equal a human being. It is the creation of the zygote that will equal a human being.

I swear..can you just cease and desist with trying to change the discussion?

I never said this.

OK so you agree that killing an embryo is killing a developing human life.

Exactly .. this is why it is not a true statement to say that the zygote is a human being.

Please provide a quote from me where I EVER said a zygote is a human being. Stop lying.

You are confused as to who is the liar. This is the "anti-aborter lie.

Well....YOU are the one that tried to float the 'unsure truth' oxymoron.

I gave you the reasons why this statment is obfuscative but regardless.
"A developing human life" is not a human.

Now I must surely castigate you for your apparent lack of attention, respect and comprehension of this discussion. How many times are you going to lie about what I wrote?

The zygote is a human cell and you are trying to equate a human cell to a human.

Gee EXCUSE ME for trying to 'equate a human cell to a human'....We are MADE UP of human cells. Besides, I never said a human cell was a human being that is YOU lying once again about what I wrote.

So far you have not validated this claim.

Why should I validate a claim I NEVER MADE!!!!

I 'aborted' the rest of your post because I grow weary of constantly correcting you and having to drag the discussion back to reality. I guess your guilt is such that you cannot bring yourself to say a zygote is a developing human life. So be it. Just stop lying about what others write will ya?

Originally Posted by RPA1

A human zygote is specifically designed to create a HUMAN BEING through the process of mitosis. Will you please stop with the 'human being' BS? How many times do I have to educate you? A zygote is a DEVELOPING human life.

A heart cell is not a zygote, the thread is not about hearts.

You are the one that keeps using the term "developing human life".

If this thread not about "all developing human life" then quit using the term and refer specifically to what you are talking about.

The fact that a zygote is developing human life no more meaningful than the fact that a heart cell is developing human life.

As such saying "zygote is developing human life" is not support for the claim that a zygote should have rights.

If this was true then we should give heart cells rights as well.

There is more to your argument however,

The zygote is not only "developing human life" .. it is specifically designed to create a human.

OK .. I agree. A zygote is designed to create a human.

Now this is a more interesting argument. It can not be said that a heart cell is designed to create a whole human .. it is only designed to create part of a human.

Please note that I did not make the stupid argument (a heart cell creates human life) which is akin to many similarly flawed anti abort arguments that use the term "human" as an adjective.

So .. I agree that you have come up with an interesting argument but this argument is not complete. It is just a statement of fact.

How does something (designed to create a human) = a human

How is being designed to create a human a sufficient condition such that rights, including the right to life, should be granted.

Originally Posted by Giftedone

You are the one that keeps using the term "developing human life".

If this thread not about "all developing human life" then quit using the term and refer specifically to what you are talking about.

The fact that a zygote is developing human life no more meaningful than the fact that a heart cell is developing human life.

As such saying "zygote is developing human life" is not support for the claim that a zygote should have rights.

If this was true then we should give heart cells rights as well.

There is more to your argument however,

The zygote is not only "developing human life" .. it is specifically designed to create a human.

OK .. I agree. A zygote is designed to create a human.

Now this is a more interesting argument. It can not be said that a heart cell is designed to create a whole human .. it is only designed to create part of a human.

Please note that I did not make the stupid argument (a heart cell creates human life) which is akin to many similarly flawed anti abort arguments that use the term "human" as an adjective.

So .. I agree that you have come up with an interesting argument but this argument is not complete. It is just a statement of fact.

How does something (designed to create a human) = a human

How is being designed to create a human a sufficient condition such that rights, including the right to life, should be granted.

Your problem is with false terminology either knowingly and deviously used by you or ignorantly used by you.

A zygote is not available for abortion in the first place. Calling abortion the removal of a zygote or 'zef' (whatever that means) is misleading and meant to minimize the impact of an abortion. You are either purposely misleading or have bought the pro-aborter propaganda hook, line and sinker.

Originally Posted by RPA1

Your problem is with false terminology either knowingly and deviously used by you or ignorantly used by you.

.

Balderdash .. what terminology have I used that is false.

It is you that uses obfuscative terminology as I pointed out numerous times.

Quit accusing me of that which you are doing .. especially when you provide no evidence for your claim.

What false terminology have I used ?

A zygote is not available for abortion in the first place. Calling abortion the removal of a zygote or 'zef' (whatever that means) is misleading and meant to minimize the impact of an abortion. You are either purposely misleading or have bought the pro-aborter propaganda hook, line and sinker

The status of the zef is where the abortion debate begins .. Period.

If you are willing to cede that the Zef is not a human being and therfor does not have the right to life of a human being then we can move on in the debate.

So far you have ceded that the zef is not a human being but you still claim it has rights on the basis of "Potential".

What difference does it make if we are discussing the potential of the zef .. or the potential of that which comes after ??.

You still have to figure out a way to put a value on that potential in order to make your cast that indeed potential does have value such that rights should be accorded on the basis of this potential.

Originally Posted by Giftedone

Balderdash .. what terminology have I used that is false.

It is you that uses obfuscative terminology as I pointed out numerous times.

Quit accusing me of that which you are doing .. especially when you provide no evidence for your claim.

What false terminology have I used ?

Apparently you also have trouble comprehending the written word. Did you even read my post?

The status of the zef is where the abortion debate begins .. Period.

If you are willing to cede that the Zef is not a human being and therfor does not have the right to life of a human being then we can move on in the debate.

As I already told you and have said many times in these abortion discussions which you have parcipated in, 'zef' or 'zygote' is not AVAILABLE for an abortion procedure. BTW a 'zef' is a gentle gust of wind and has absolutely nothing to do with the human reproductive system except to be used by fanatic pro-aborters in order to minimize the horrendous procedure of abortion.

So far you have ceded that the zef is not a human being but you still claim it has rights on the basis of "Potential".

What difference does it make if we are discussing the potential of the zef .. or the potential of that which comes after ??.

Again you are off track, I have ceded nothing. A zygote is not available for abortion (as I again remind you) so your whole premise is moot.

You still have to figure out a way to put a value on that potential in order to make your cast that indeed potential does have value such that rights should be accorded on the basis of this potential.

So there is no value in an embryo? Apparently women disagree with your POV.

"LIFE asked 96 women in a follow-up survey whether they would have gone through with the abortion had they known the medical and emotional problems abortions can cause. Sixty-four of the women answered no and most very emphatically.

Virtually all of the women said that women considering abortions should be given more information on potential problems."

http://www.lifenews.com/2006/09/12/nat-2579/



How about you ask these folks?

What is a zef? I googled it and can't find anything relating to abortion.

Originally Posted by RPA1

Apparently you also have trouble comprehending the written word. Did you even read my post?

My reading comprehension is good enough to know that it is you that uses false terminology and not I.

Originally Posted by RPA1

Your problem is with false terminology either knowingly and deviously used by you or ignorantly used by you.
.

If you are going to accuse someone .. then show some proof.

I have shown how the specific terminology that you use is obfuscative and unclear. "a developing human life".

What false terminology are you talking about ?

As I already told you and have said many times in these abortion discussions which you have parcipated in, 'zef' or 'zygote' is not AVAILABLE for an abortion procedure. BTW a 'zef' is a gentle gust of wind and has absolutely nothing to do with the human reproductive system except to be used by fanatic pro-aborters in order to minimize the horrendous procedure of abortion.

Good .. if the zef has nothing to do with human reproduction then you should have no problem recognizing it is not a human.

Again you are off track, I have ceded nothing. A zygote is not available for abortion (as I again remind you) so your whole premise is moot.

The status of the zygote is one of the primary, if not the primary, argument of the debate ?

The reason you do not want to discuss the zygote is because you have no valid rational that justifies not ceding that it is a human being.

We can go further down the line if you like.. embryo, fetus and so on. I have no problem with that.

You are still going to have the same question to answer which is: "If no human being exists at the zygote stage, then when does a human being exist"

Your claim " it is developing human life" or "potential human life" is no more valid for an embryo than it is a zygote.

So there is no value in an embryo? Apparently women disagree with your POV.

1)I never said that there was no value in an embryo.
2) your generalization of disagreement to all women is a fallacy.

Originally Posted by PatriotNews

What is a zef? I googled it and can't find anything relating to abortion.

It's an acronym. Z is for zygote, E is for embryo, and F is for fetus.

Originally Posted by PatriotNews

What is a zef? I googled it and can't find anything relating to abortion.

As I already posted it is a gentle wind. Another example of the pro-aborters wishing to minimize the abortion procedure.

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

It's an acronym. Z is for zygote, E is for embryo, and F is for fetus.

It's real definition is as an abbreviation of 'zephyr' and is used to describe a small puff of wind. It also is used to describe flatulence.

Your definition of 'zef' as an acronym makes no sense at all.