I can always depend on you to miss the point in spectacular fashion. Everybody agrees on full human rights after birth, it is full human rights after conception that we are arguing here. I hope you are not actually armed and in the vicinity of any heads. I would have defended your mother with all my heart. No, we're definitely talking a "different drummer" thing here.
at what point would an abortion to said embryo look like murder. Id go with that and work backwards timewise I suppose. im sure that would be a good start.
Nice. I attack one point you kept arguing, and not only do you fail to offer a rebuttal, but you actually pretend you didn't even raise that point in the first place. John 1, Red 0.
any particular reason you just completely ignored the 1st 2 sentences of Red's post? Or any other point that anyone has made to you since you joined?
Uhh, the rebuttle was sentence two of paragraph one. I can explain it for you if you don't understand. :wink: You see, if you shoot someone in the head, then you've killed an undisputed human being, which has both legal and religious implications and nobody disagrees. The argument here is about aborting a fertilized egg cell which is not illegal and has only religious implications.
A sperm is a cell that is a part of a whole. It has the same DNA as the dude who made it. The single cell human embryo has its own DNA, maintains its own homeostasis, consumes, and expends energy on its own regardless of the activities of the mother. This notion that life begins at viability is a cop out by people who want to dehumanize what is obviously human so they don't feel guilty about killing it. You should talk about evading questions. I have posed several to you and all you have given back is straw man arguments and more questions. Don't be so obtuse. Furthermore do you care to demonstrate where I have stated what I believe on the ultra rare "life of the mother" case? Otherwise, follow your own command and stop putting words in my mouth. To answer you I think the life of the mother is as important as the life of the baby, and in the 1 in a million chance that an abortion is medically necessary to save a mother's life then I think a difficult decision should be made by the mother, but this instance is so rare that supporting abortion for all because of it is a foolhardy justification.
No. I'm not an extremeist or a zealot. I just think that murder is bad, and that abortion is murder. I would say yes. If support another's right so smoke you support the thing you hate albeit indirectly.
No, Red: the fact that there are nonbelievers out there that believe a fertilized egg cell is a human absolutely destroys your argument that this is just a religious issue.
