"I accuse that woman there of having had an abortion!!!"

""I think what might be meant by "humiliating statistic" is that nearly half (although that number has been shown to be quite false) of American women are using abortion as a form of birth control.""""""



Ya, abortion is birth control....so?

 

As a matter of personal interest what are the real issues for you?

 

How do you prove a murder where there is no evidence left? Answer the question Gorn.

 

You don't - there has to be a "body of evidence"

 

Well there ya go....end thread.

 

then, with respect, any laws banning abortion are toothless and moot so what is the point in having them. It would be like having a law that makes it illegal to take a breath under water .. an object in futility ... yet it does not stop pro-lifers pushing to make such a law.

 

Take a breath under water???....really??? Kind of like what babies do when they are aborted, only worse. Sometimes they are torn limb from limb.

 

I see you get it then ... abortion laws are nothing but an an object in futility, and would have as much meaning as a law against breathing under water.

Got to love the emotional projection here though, you do know that not a single 'baby' is killed in abortion. I do understand the emotional need for pro-lifers to portray a nice cute little bouncing baby being the 'victim' of an abortion, it is a shame it is also dishonest.

Oh did you miss the question or just evade it?

 

The purpose of having an abortion is so that a human is not created.

- - - Updated - - -

I am against late term abortion for a number of reasons but most abortions occur early in term.

In the early stages of pregnancy there is no 'baby" ... no living human exists.

 

FYI: human sperm meets human egg=human baby, child. It's a human being for Christs sake!!! What the hell do you think it is a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing monkey???

 

Actually that was the point - unlike murder there is rarely any evidence of abortion - particularly medical abortion

- - - Updated - - -

No it is a fertilised egg that will not become anything else unless it is implanted correctly in a non-hostile environment

 

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

The wilful misinformation on this subject is horrific

 

Make excuses for the murder of babies. Notice everyone for killing these babies has a life. Is a living human being with hopes, dreams and a life that you deny to others...millions. Honestly, I don't know how you people sleep at night knowing and supporting the murder of innocent human beings.

 

Like to tell me how God, mother nature, Cthulhu or which ever deity you want to name as running the universe supports the "murder" of far more "babies" by your definition than man ever has?

50-70% of fertilised eggs fail to implant or if they do implant are naturally aborted because of bad timing. maternal health issues or plain bad luck

 

If you can't see the difference between the two, God have mercy on your soul.

 

You stating "its a baby" does not make a zygote a baby.

The zygote is a single human cell. That is a scientific fact that is not debated by either side. Its a human cell and not a monkey.

You want to claim that it is more than just a human cell... Okay

What are your reasons that prove the claim, (or at least give a convincing argument) for the claim that the single cell at conception is a baby.

 

You/10char.

 

LOL - unintelligible nonsense is the usual response when I ask that question ... not to worry.

If you are a lover of the constitution and individual freedom as I am I have a great argument that allows you to keep your belief.

 

No, it's The unintelligible answer that you give. Guess you were never an embryo, a cell, a zygote. LMFAO!!!!

 

Beats the heck out of her Oh-So-Dramatic , "God have mercy on your soul"...

 

What was unintelligible about my answer ? Did you not understand the part about the zygote being a human cell?

In order for me to be something, zygote in this case, I first have to exist.

What is your rational or evidence that proves a human exists at the zygote stage ?

 

The answer you're referring to is quite clear and easy to read and understand...written in short sentences and no big words.
HOW did you get, ""Guess you were never an embryo, a cell, a zygote."" from that post ???

 

The classic bait and switch. Instead of providing evidence that supports your own claim ... respond with a question or fallacious comment.

Rapunzel's response is similar to the classic Reagan fallacy " I've notice that everyone who is for abortion has already been born"

Notice that this statement actually says nothing in relation to whether or not a zygote is a human. It just states that people who have an opinion on abortion are humans as all humans have been born.

What the hearer is supposed to do is equate a born living human to a zygote. Unfortunately there is nothing in the statement that shows how a born human and a zygote are equal. We are just supposed to "assume" equality with no justification.

The same is true of statements such as "were you never a zygote". Again we are supposed to assume that a zygote is equal to a living human but as in the Reagan example no rational for this equality is given.

Further you are supposed to assume that an entity that has the potential to create a human is actually a human.

This is the fallacy "assuming the premise". Here the premise "I exist" at the zygote stage is assumed or that I somehow existed as a zygote.

The fact of the matter is that not a single cell that form the structure of the born human that might be created exists at the zygote stage. These cells will not be created until the embryoblast stage.

The zygote in fact may create two or more humans. Technically any of the first 200 or so totipotent cells (none of which will be part of the structure of a born human) can individually create a human.

The question then becomes "which one am I". The answer of course is none as I have not been created yet

 

I can - can you?

- - - Updated - - -

A+B amy - C but A+C does not = B

Not every zygote becomes a human in the natural order of things

 

The difference is that natural cause is responsible for more baby dumping than human intent. I don't see why God would need to punish someone for not making that specific distinction?