What are your thoughts on abortion?

[Anonymous]

For (Legal)

Against (Illegal)

Undecided

[DaisyM23]

incredible how many people are against abortion - have your own beliefs but there's no taking away from the fact that people would just turn to more dangerous alternatives - plus i find that many cases of people being pro-life only care about the foetus' life not the mother's and certainly not the child's for if they're born into a safe environment and will receive the care every child deserves - and there are always instances of rape or just any case where the mother CAN'T bring a baby up - people who aren't financially or emotionally ready have no business bringing an entirely new person into this world just to fuck them up - people with no experience or understanding just say carry the baby to term then put them up for adoption, do you know how much the body changes during pregnancy? the amount of mental and hormonal changes and after effects of both pregnancy and labour, and yet people just say give the baby up after - i'd prefer to give more care to the person carrying the baby than an unborn person - and yes, people should use birth control properly instead of being irresponsible but birth control sometimes fails - and in a relationship, yes the other partner deserves a say but it's ultimately up to the woman to decide to carry a baby for 9 months and no one deserves to be forced to go through pregnancy

[4ngelic]

legal but only for the first 3 months. after that illegal unless its a 14yo, rape, incest, the baby has a severe deformity or syndrome or the mom's health is at risk and there's no other way than abortion

[strateguy632]

that sign proves pro abortion know they are wrong. they try to "allow even when no danger" justifying with a sign about death. but they know they need to lie i mean misrepresent their opponents. like i speak for what other people think instead of them. the fact they do that exhibited they themselves KNOW they have no moral basis nor reasoning... to harm a fetus. just talk for agenda.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I'm a pro choice because I support choice. I'm not someone who has a supremacy about beliefs and point of views.

[Cubus]

What choice do babies have then?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus What babies? But even if they are "babies", it's also not their choice to be born. I'm not giving them human rights the same way I don't give human rights to cells. I'd rather give the rights to the woman or the father who has already participated in our society who actually has a name, reputation, and has done something to society.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I meant im not giving fetuses human rights. Babies are a different story.

[Cubus]

"I'm not giving them human rights the same way I don't give human rights to cells"

So you're not gonna give human rights to yourself? You're also cells

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus I'm not a sperm cell, egg cell nor a fetus. I'm a human. Learn the difference.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Also we're not called "human cells" for a reason.

[Cubus]

"Human" is a species. Your comment has nothing to do with it.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Then you've validated my point. www.google.com/search You've given me more valid reason is to why i'm giving humans "human rights" Being a species is one of them.

[Cubus]

You are also cells.

We can go around in circle as long as you want.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Ok i'll break the circle. I'm talking about sperms and egg cells. And despite how you think of humans as cells, humans are neither of those kinds of cells. Again "human rights" So are you just being stupid just to give yourself an excuse to just run around in circles?

[Cubus]

Neither sperm nor unfertilised egg is a living being. They become one when they combine.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Guess again. If a sperm cell isn't really a living thing, then they would've move on their own just like how blood cells are considered "alive". Except they're not "humans" just like a fetus. Again "human rights" and it doesn't take a genius.

[Cubus]

Except blood cells are not living beings.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

www.google.com/search guess again. And if you like to argue it isn't then i can say the same thing to a fetus. If a fetus can die then so can sperm cells. And it still doesn't matter either way because they are still not human beings. You can kill an ant and they're also a living thing. Should you get sued for it?

[Cubus]

They in fact do not. Bloods cells cannot eat, breathe, reproduce, grow etc. which are traits that are needed to considered alive.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then you are making your own science. The google search said so otherwise despite how they don't eat or grow but they are still moving beings that couldn't survive outside of its habitat. And they use a process called endocytosis, cells ingest nutrients, fluids, proteins and other molecules to actually survive. But if all you are concerned about is "living things" then again i should so you for killing an ant

[Aiko_E_Lara]

It's also ironic that you're trying to claim that cells are not living things while your yourself is saying that we are cells. That could just mean we are not living things then. That where your logic falls apart

[Cubus]

Google search also says that Nessie exists and many other things that are not considered true.

According to your logic - blood cells are not living beings, because I said so in the internet.

[Cubus]

We are a bunch of cells. One sperm cell or one blood cell is not a living being. I listed it before

Read carefully next time, ok?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Then with your logic, that means we're not living things. It's more like you're not even reading what you're saying. It's like you saying "Food is atoms, shit is also atoms so I eat shit" is that what you do?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Also where did it actually say that nessie existed? All that's actually come out are articles about people believing they exist so it's not google who said so other wise. So what makes you think you're even more qualified than a search engine used by billions around the world?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus And if sperms and blood cells aren't alive, then they wouldn't have use the process called endocytosis. You're still ignoring how you just cared about if it's a living thing. There for I should sue you for killing an ant, mosquito, probably eating meat or whatever then.

[Cubus]

"All that's actually come out are articles about people believing they exist "

You just realised how internet works. Congratulations

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus There's a difference between talking about people believing they exist vs talking about it's actual information. So tell me where it's said that nessie actually existed and all it's information?

And you're still ignoring how you only cared about "living things" when i can just sue you for killing an ant.

Also you basically saying "Food is atom, shit is atom so there for i can eat shit"

Also you failed to realize how diverse internet is. If you think it's stupid then why are you even here? This is the internet? You can go back to living under a rock

[Cubus]

And sorry, but you are wrong. Endocytosis doesn't define something as a living thing.

Living things need seven traits to be considered so: movement, breathing, response to stimuli, growth, excretion, reproduction and eating. Neither blood cells nor sperm cells meet these requirements.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Then again what makes you even more qualified than Google?

Ok you think sperms don't move? I guess you've never heard of a microscope before. For your sake of your argument, i'm gonna pretend it's actually not a living thing because if the way you make qualifications for living things. I can also say in order for something to be a "living thing" it needs to be outside of the womb, make sounds, fully developed and has a social reputation so I don't consider a fetus a living thing based on my qualifications on what a living thing should be. You're not the only one who has a point of view here.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Again im not gonna stop repeating this because you tend to sleep on this statement.

And you're still ignoring how you only cared about "living things" when i can just sue you for killing an ant.

Also you basically saying "Food is atom, shit is atom so there for i can eat shit"

Maybe you have no solid arguments for this?

[Cubus]

You probably fail to understand that "living being" is a much narrower term than "atom"

[Cubus]

I never said they don't move.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus "Living things need seven traits to be considered so: ""movement"", breathing, response to stimuli, growth, excretion, reproduction and eating. Neither blood cells nor sperm cells meet these requirements." You said it yourself and with you making qualifications on what living things should be, then that just means it depends so I can also consider a sperm a living thing. www.givelegacy.com/.../ Also if you think "living thing" is a narrower term, you're just overdoing it with your "narrowing it down"

But again all you care is it being a living thing. I should sue you for killing an ant then

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Also this is basically you. "Humans are living things. So are ants. So there for we're ants" Yeah that's how your world works.

[Cubus]

I said they need seven traits and not one. Read carefully next time.

[Cubus]

I actually don't kill ants or beetles. I throw them away through my window, to the garden.

Why did you assume I kill ants?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus And you still failed to read what I said about "qualifications". Those 7 traits are what one qualifies something to be a living thing. And of all your life, you say you've never killed an ant, not even a single one, I'd say you're lying. You may have stepped on one without even noticing. And even if i'm not taking about you, you still sound like someone who'd actually kill someone for an ant.

[Cubus]

You compare intended abortion to accidentally stepping on an ant?

[Cubus]

"And even if i'm not taking about you, you still sound like someone who'd actually kill someone for an ant."

Do you have any proof, mister?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Well you do sound like it because and how you think being a living thing is all that matters is proof enough. Unless you wanna take it back. And no but I can compare intended abortion to an intended killing of an ant. If you don't like the idea of me comparing a fetus to an ant, a sperm cell or any other things humans basically kill whether they're pests or for food, ironically enough you're comparing a fetus to a human being while also comparing humans to cells while saying cells aren't living things at all. You've been contradicting yourself from the start.

[Cubus]

"ironically enough you're comparing a fetus to a human being "

Because fetus is a human being. Homo sapiens sapiens.

"while also comparing humans to cells"

I don't compare humans to cells. I say that humans are made of cells, which is not the same.

Is saying "your body is made of water" comparing you to water?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Then a human sperm is a human fetus. And what else are made of cells? Other animals too and we kill them for meat. And? And no I don't compare myself to water thesame way you compare humans to cells. Which is exactly why I categorize humans, cells and fetus to be different unlike you.

So tell me, why is it called fetus then? Why isn't it just called human?

[Cubus]

"Then a human sperm is a human fetus"

Emmm, nope. Fetus is a sperm and egg combined. Sperm alone and egg alone is not a living being, as it's not able to grow. I already wrote it something like 30 replies before.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Then I can also say no to your notion saying that a fetus is a human. You see, you have your own point of view on what is considered a human and so do I or we pro choice. And you're not the only one who can provide facts. I can provide facts helloclue.com/.../what-is-the-difference-between-an-embryo-a-fetus-and-a-baby And the obvious difference is a fetus is not born while a baby is and in order for someone to be qualified as a "human" to get "human rights", they need to be a "born" human. So tell me, is a fetus born? Yes or no? Then you'll have my conclusion.

[Cubus]

The link you posted doesn;t specify when it is a human and when it is not a human, or doesn;t use the word "human" at all. It has nothing to support your thesis,

[Cubus]

By the way, as I listed before. Being born is not required to be alive. Child that is born in 9th month is as alive as a child born in 7th month.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus However it id differentiate a fetus and a baby. Saying which of them are humans beings with human rights would fall under point of views just like you saying being born is not required to be alive. Your definition of "alive" is you only limit it to macro organism when the term "alive" is vastly used in any other things other than what's a fetus or a human. And if that's also the case, I can also just say a sperm entering the egg is not required to have human rights because a fetus and a baby are different. You like to put laws on people beliefs but what about if we try to put laws on pro lifes forcing women to give birth? Don't like it? Then you're a hypocrite.

[Cubus]

It doesn;t actually say what the "baby" is.

Have you actually read this article or just sendind me something that fits your thesis?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Yeah I do read and maybe you didn't because you're so ignorant about the difference. However tho, it's still a fact that baby being born while a fetus isn't born is a difference you still failed to see.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And here's another one for your ignorance www.ncfamily.org/.../

[Cubus]

It's never stated in the article that the baby has to be born to be a baby. "Baby" is an informal word, not a medical one.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus And a fetus is called a fetus for whatever reason. It's also not stated that once a sperm enters an egg, it's already a baby. It's all in one's point of view. So try again? You're not the only one with a point of view.

[Cubus]

"And a fetus is called a fetus for whatever reason."

Probably because "child in mother's womb" was too long.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus And you've proven my point. You've exactly given a difference. They could've just call it a baby but no. The word fetus is even a longer one and it is a special term is because it's has a clear difference to a baby. So that's where your logic falls.

[Cubus]

Baby has a broader meaning, not only unborn children.

[Cubus]

You still didn't show a difference between a fetus and a human as you claim so.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus When baby also has another term like children, child, infant, new born and so on but neither of those are "fetus".

I guess you just wanna deliberately ignore their differences just to give yourself an excuse to dismiss this topic. You wanna ignore that a human is born while a fetus isn't. That's one obvious difference even a morons can understand.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus What you said "Probably because "child in mother's womb" was too long." You're the one who basically gave the difference "child in mother's womb" so the way you contradict things are showing again

[Cubus]

Again - human doesn't have to be born to be a human. But I guess it's too complicated for you to understand unless I write it 4 times

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And again that is still a point of view but that doesn't still remove the fact that that is the difference just because you don't agree with it.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

So why would you actually repeat what you just said what i've already debunked it like a million times?

[Cubus]

- You didn't debunk me.

- Human, also as a fetus, fulfills all 7 traits defining a life, I listed above

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus As if you've actually provided anything to prove you point of view is actually factual. Saying "because science said so" is considered appealing to authority fallacy.

- That's your point of view. But I can also just say that doesn't make someone a human just like how you say being unborn doesn't make someone "not human" So what if you've listed it above? It's not like i haven't talked about that at all.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Simple. If you say just because it's being unborn doesn't mean it's not human then I can say also just say just because it has 7 traits doesn't meant it is a human life. So say that again then I can also just say your 7 traits is irrelevant.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Also even if you keep bringing up the 7 traits, that still doesn't mean a fetus is born like a baby. That still remains a fact however

[Cubus]

I said many times that unborn child fulfills all requirements to be considered alive (7 requirements I listed before).

It's not "because I think so. This is what science says.

[Cubus]

"I can say also just say just because it has 7 traits doesn't meant it is a human life."

You understand that's the definition, right?

[Cubus]

"Also even if you keep bringing up the 7 traits, that still doesn't mean a fetus is born like a baby. That still remains a fact however"

Fetus doesn;t have to be born, to be a human. Even when the baby is in mother's bomb it still eats, reacts to stimuli, breathes etc

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus "Fetus doesn;t have to be born, to be a human. Even when the baby is in mother's bomb it still eats, reacts to stimuli, breathes etc" In your point of view but in my point of view, a fetus is a fetus and a human is a human. So say it again and I'll say this again.

[Cubus]

There's no such species as "fetus".

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus And who's saying a fetus is a species? I'm not even considering it to be one. So?

[Cubus]

You do. You said fetus is not a human. So you sugest that it's a different species.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Yeah i'm saying fetus is not a human in my point of view because in my point of view, in order for a fetus to be human is it has to be born. So if you don't like that idea and try to put laws on women aborting then it should also be fair to put laws for people like you forcing women to give birth or forcing the father to keep the "child"

[Cubus]

You either say that's a human or a different species. There's no third option.

If you say something else you oppose science.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus How about if I say so otherwise? It's not a human nor a different species. And there goes your fallacy again appealing to authority. Your point of view can't be Science. Science gives us data and information about certain things and it's up to us to decide on what we consider something to be. i can easily just say that if you say a fetus and baby are thesame, then you oppose science.

[Cubus]

Then what it is? :)

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus It's a fetus. Again you can't read. Maybe you suck at reading as well

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Now it's my turn. Is a fetus born or not? What is it then?

[Cubus]

Fetus is not born. It's a human in mother's womb, at early stage of development.

[Cubus]

Now answer my question mister :)

[Cubus]

You see - I do not try to create something that do not exist. I'm not like you.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Also, I bet you wanted me to say "human fetus" Well sure I can say that. But I can still say a human fetus is a human fetus not a human baby. So I'm still not giving it human rights unless its' a human baby.

Facts I've actually gave. A fetus isn't born but a human baby is. A fetus is not out of the womb while a baby is. A baby eats with their mouth not with their umbilical chords. A baby makes noise. A baby has a "birth certificate" we celebrate "birthdays" Except for the birth certificate and birthdays which is a social construct, the rest of what I said are facts. So what exactly is your point of wanting to hear scientific facts when you're just gonna down play it with your own set of beliefs? No matter how much you disagree, Those facts about babies and fetus will never change which is the criteria I use

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Maybe you're also the one who say that a fetus is born. I can also just say that you're delusional for saying a fetus is a human then. How about it?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

"Human baby" to be specific

[Cubus]

"A fetus isn't born but a human baby is"

Nope. There's no definition that says baby has to be alive to be a baby. Links you sent me also confirm it.

"A baby eats with their mouth not with their umbilical chords."

There's nothing that says that you have to make noise to be alive. Using your definition, people that are deaf and dumb are not humans, because they do not make sounds.

[Cubus]

And there's no definition that says that you have to eat with your mouth to be classified as either human or a living being.

[Cubus]

"Maybe you're also the one who say that a fetus is born."

I already answered this a few replies ago. If you read the discussion you would know.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And that definition is a point of view even if you give a link. Saying it is a human being is a conclusion anyone can have.

And he even if you say even if the eat umbilical cord, that's not what i born human being would still do which still remain a fact and a mute person is born.

So if you like to downplay the fact that a born baby and an unborn baby aka a fetus are this same then i'm just going to downplay your 7 traits. Just because they have 7 traits doesn't meant they should have human rights.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

*And even if you say they eat through umbilical cord

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You know i am also already answered that few replies ago. You can give all your data all you want but what you consider a human being will still remain your point of view

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Any facts you can give to a fetus, there is still that one thing that you can to tend overlook. The word "unborn" so go on and repeat what you said about they don't have to be born to be considered a human being. You already know what i'm going to say about that

[Cubus]

"And that definition is a point of view even if you give a link. Saying it is a human being is a conclusion anyone can have."

You claim that unborn baby is neither a human nor a different species. So you have to prove it.

"And he even if you say even if the eat umbilical cord, that's not what i born human being would still do which still remain a fact"

Newborn babies eat mommy's milk. This is also not what you would eat.

" and a mute person is born."

Yes, it is born, but according to your definition it's not a human because one has to make sounds to be a human, according to what you say

"Just because they have 7 traits doesn't meant they should have human rights."

So you believe that even if someone has all biological processes it should not be a human because you say so and has nothing to base your thesis on.

[Cubus]

"You can give all your data all you want but what you consider a human being will still remain your point of view"

So you're opposed to science?

I don't even have to prove anything then because what you just said is "even if scientific data says otherwise, I will don't believe it and have my own version"

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Ok i have to admit i use the wrong sets of words. What i'm actually trying to say is that an unborn baby is a human fetus not a "human being". Maybe if we i am not specifying, i could say it is a human. But to be more specific a human fetus and a human being are two different things so it's still doesn't mean i'm giving it human rights and that is where i can give you multiple reasons why so we can move on in this topic. One of the reason is it has to be born.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And if you cannot agree that a human fetus is unborn well i human being is born, you're also opposed to science

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Unborn *while a human being is born.

[Cubus]

"What i'm actually trying to say is that an unborn baby is a human fetus not a "human being"."

One does not exclude the other. Human fetus is a human being at the early stage of life.

"One of the reason is it has to be born."

It doesn;t have to be born. Even Wikipedia says that birth is the beginning of life outside the mother's body, and not life in overall.

[Cubus]

"And if you cannot agree that a human fetus is unborn well i human being is born, you're also opposed to science"

Neither do I disagree with the fact that the fetus is unborn nor the human being has to be born to be a human being.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And that is another one of your point of view. In my point of view, the reason why they are categorized differently and called a fetus and a born baby is because they are indeed different. If you like to bring up wikipedia intestine i can also bring up how the article i actually presented below differentiated a fetus and unborn baby. So if you disagree with the fact that the fetus is unborn, then you are opposed to science.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

*Like to bring up wikipedia, in that case i can also bring up all the article i actually presented before differentiated a fetus and a born baby.

[Cubus]

"called a fetus and a born baby is because they are indeed different"

I never said they are not different. But different doesn;t mean one is alive and other one is not.

You and I are different and it doesn;t mean I am alive and you are not.

"If you like to bring up wikipedia intestine i can also bring up how the article i actually presented below differentiated a fetus and unborn baby. "

It didn't present actually.

" So if you disagree with the fact that the fetus is unborn, then you are opposed to science."

You are opposed to science, because you say that fetus doesn;t belong to any species. Science says that every living being belong to some species.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And you see you actually admit that they are not different but it's only your point of view that is saying that you are not excluding anything. However i do have a different point of view because science named them accordingly.

It did present it actually.

And i can also say you are opposed to science because you treat them similarly. But even if they are actually the same you say, i still couldn't care less and this isn't even a matter of supporting "murder" as all youd like to say. I value a woman's life over a fetus who is someone who actually has a reputation, name, and has already contributed to society. A fetus can't remember anything so it's not like it matters if they're going to be aborted anyways. They are only going to cause burden if they're actually being unwanted and it's going to burden themselves as they grow up. Now if you like to strawman saying we're murderers, it's not different if i say you are just a sadist who'd torture someone without giving them proper death sentence

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And you see we are far from being finished here because you only like the focus about science what you want overlooking ethics. And if you wonder why i don't support killing babies but not a fetus, the mother or the father both had nine months to decide so therefore they shouldn't have any excuse to kill the baby that is already born. Why do you think we all have birth certificates but we don't have conceptions certificates? Why do we celebrate birthdays instead of conceptions day? That's because birth matters more than conceptions. It is just know that you make conceptions a big deal when it comes to you being a prolife for what? If you care about life so much then why not adopt a child in an orphanage right now?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Small correction, sure there are concepcion certificates but i don't think it applies to all society and they are more likely to me not a valid document if you want to present something for your ID. All you like to see if they are "murderers" without actually taking a look at youself. If you think i'm some sort of a feminist, they're BS. I'm not even just doing just for women but also for men who can potentially get sued for child support even if they aren't the fathers. You see those are the kind of benefits you get from abortion but you let your feelings blind you and use half of the science as an excuse

[Aiko_E_Lara]

So if you like to say abortion is bad because biology said so, social science and ethics would beg to differ otherwise.

[Cubus]

Science doesn't name neither "child" nor "baby". Only fetus, which is a human at the early stage of growth.

"I value a woman's life over a fetus"

This is where we differ. I value all humans' lives equally.

"and has already contributed to society"

So people that are burglars or unemployed should not have the right to life, because they didn;t contribute to the society?

"A fetus can't remember anything so it's not like it matters if they're going to be aborted anyways. "

Except it's untrue. Unborn baby can actually remember things.

" They are only going to cause burden if they're actually being unwanted"

It's your choice to have sex. Either use a condom or don't have sex.

[Cubus]

"And you see we are far from being finished here because you only like the focus about science what you want overlooking ethics. "

Like I said - I believe all humans lives are equally valuable. I touch ethics quite much.

"Why do you think we all have birth certificates but we don't have conceptions certificates? " - Probably because it's very hard to decide when did conception occur. Most women don't realise they are pregnant for a few weeks.

"Why do we celebrate birthdays instead of conceptions day? "

It's an old custom, back from the times when prenatal knowledge was almost non existing.

"If you care about life so much then why not adopt a child in an orphanage right now?"

I don't exclude this in a future. Right now I don't have money nor a wife to raise a child with.

[Cubus]

"I'm not even just doing just for women but also for men who can potentially get sued for child support even if they aren't the fathers. "

That's what DNA tests are for. But that's a different problem.

[Cubus]

"So if you like to say abortion is bad because biology said so, social science and ethics would beg to differ otherwise."

Social science says that all humans are equal and discrimination is prohibited.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Which a human at an early stage of growth is different to a human outside of a womb.

Equally you say, there's no such thing as true equality because if you would be someone who value all humans equally then youd be everywhere at once treating all humans like your own. And by saying you support a fetus life, you're also supporting the detriment of those who don't want it so you can accurately be someone who value all life equally.

I don't assume they are all burglars and unemployed. And if they are burglars an unemployed, then they have their own consequences for that.

As of right now you don't remember being a fetus because your memories got wiped out as soon as you are two-years-old. Nobody stays in fetus state for long.

Everybody has a choice to do something they want to do and there are always risk and if it doesn't have to be sex. If someone actually broke their arm for playing at the swing, the go to the doctor to fix it that doesn't mean they should stop going to the swings. Sex is also their freedom and if accident happens, they go to the doctor and fix it. The only real concern of abortion is their health and side effects which is their responsibility but other than that, that's their life

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You can't accurately be someone who value all life equally.

You may also value a criminal who can potentially kill hundreds of innocent people.

[Cubus]

"Everybody has a choice to do something they want to do and there are always risk and if it doesn't have to be sex."

You can do whatever you want, unless it doesn't hurt someone else. My freedom ends where a freedom of another person begins.

I can't just walk into my neighbour's house if he doesn't allow me, even if I want to enter his house.

[Cubus]

"Sex is also their freedom and if accident happens"

That's why you should be responsible when having sex.

You can say 'I want to use my freedom and make a fire" but then you have to be responsible enough not to burn the whole house.

[Cubus]

"You may also value a criminal who can potentially kill hundreds of innocent people."

You can value a criminal for many different reasons, but it doesn;t mean a criminal doesn;t deserve a punishment.

[Cubus]

"If someone actually broke their arm for playing at the swing, the go to the doctor to fix it that doesn't mean they should stop going to the swings."

Then it's up to you if you want to still use a swing or not, because it only affects you. Abortion kills someone else - it doesn't affect your freedom only.

[Cubus]

"As of right now you don't remember being a fetus because your memories got wiped out as soon as you are two-years-old."

Using that logic "human" starts at 2 years old, because then you start to remember things.

"Nobody stays in fetus state for long."

You're right, Captain Obvious.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Yes everybody should be responsible just like how you should be responsible if you want to play at the playground but doesn't mean accidents don't happen. Like the broken arm analogy, that doesn't mean you're gonna stop playing at the playground but you're going to be extra careful next time. When i said you can do whatever you want, i didn't mean to exclude responsibility.

You are ironically hurting someone else by actually being a pro-life. You don't realize that you can also hurt the baby that's gonna grow up being neglected. Its because you already considered as a "someone" before theyre even born for you to know who they really are.

Like saying it kill someone else, and that is still your point of view to consider it at someone else. If you want to use biology then i can use logic and ethics. Logically speaking, fetus are not someone who i can actually get to see and to actually talk to who has a reputation why should i let someone suffer over a fetus? If it is our choice to have sex then you're also like saying that you shouldn't fix your arm if you broke it because you were playing at the swings.

[Cubus]

"You don't realize that you can also hurt the baby that's gonna grow up being neglected. "

Who's gonna get hurt? Someone who was neglected or someone who was killed?

"If you want to use biology then i can use logic and ethics"

I already used logic and ethics. You don't have an edge on that one.

"Logically speaking, fetus are not someone who i can actually get to see and to actually talk "

Scientists actually say that babies in the womb can hear what you say, react to music etc.

"If it is our choice to have sex then you're also like saying that you shouldn't fix your arm if you broke it because you were playing at the swings."

You can have sex (use your freedom) as long as you don't hurt someone else (rape or abortion)

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus The baby getting neglected hurts more than it gets aborted. As i've said, it wouldn't matter all that much when they have very little knowledge on what life is really all about.

It's easy for you to say when you actually have no edge on that. All you're doing is pushing your own point of view into others and make strawman arguments about murdering. And you say you have used them? Tell me, what benefits does forcing a woman to give birth to an unwanted child? Because I've already given you it's downsides.

I said "see and talk" you need some device or to rip a woman's womb to see it but you don't get to see it inside the woman's womb with your naked eyes. And it still can't say anything and it's so obvious that it doesn't need rocket science. I'm going with obvious facts than technical facts.

That's just like saying "It's ok to play at the playground but you're not allowed to break your bones." As if everyone doing what they do is intentionally burdening themselves. Like I said, accidents still happens which is not intended. And I'm they're not allowed to abort, then they're not allowed to fix their broken bones and have to live with it forever. Rape on the other hand is not an accident. And i've already talk about the ethics of abortion which all you like to see is murder. How not allowing abortion can just make me conclude you're a sadist.

[Cubus]

"The baby getting neglected hurts more than it gets aborted"

Emm, nope.

"Tell me, what benefits does forcing a woman to give birth to an unwanted child? "

Nobody forces the woman to get pregnant. She controls when she has sex.

"I said "see and talk" you need some device or to rip a woman's womb to see it but you don't get to see it inside the woman's womb with your naked eyes."

You can't also see many other small organisms and there's a scientific consensus they are alive.

"And I'm they're not allowed to abort, then they're not allowed to fix their broken bones and have to live with it forever"
You can do whatever you want to your bones but not to someone else's bones.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Nope in your opinion. But not everyone likes to suffer being alive.

Again what's the benefits of letting them keep an unwanted child just because they had an accident? Sex is their choice but getting pregnant isn't. Learn the difference.

Which we don't care much if they're killed. I clean my toilet and I don't care about those organism in there.

You can say "someone else" all you want. That's still your point of view.

[Cubus]

"Nope in your opinion. But not everyone likes to suffer being alive."

How do you know the baby would suffer. Did you ask?

"Again what's the benefits of letting them keep an unwanted child just because they had an accident?"

It's not about benefits. It's about ethics. Nowadays there is a consensus that all human are equal.

"Sex is their choice but getting pregnant isn't"

Sex results in a pregancy. It doesn't take rocket science to understand it. If you don't you're either stupid or reckless.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus I know because I was once a fetus and I didn't remember anything.

Then I abortion is for the benefits and ethics for the detriment of multiple people. Really what is ethics without benefits? You can't consider yourself ethical if you're all about 1 but not for the others. I'd rather be "unethical" to one who don't have any reputation just yet and be ethical to the other than vice versa.

Then all sex could actually result to pregnancy then. But how come there are actually multiple ways to prevent it? You see, that's exactly where it differs. Maybe according to you, anyone who have sex should get pregnant, anyone who plays in a play ground should be injured.

[Cubus]

"I know because I was once a fetus and I didn't remember anything"

So you speak for everyone?

"Really what is ethics without benefits? "

Do you help poor people to get some benefits of it?

"Then all sex could actually result to pregnancy then."

You're right, Captain Obvious.

"But how come there are actually multiple ways to prevent it?"

There's a difference between preventing to create a baby and killing a baby.

Answered this question: why is preventing an illness better than curing it and why?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus I speak for other pro choices also yeah I can speak for everyone. It's a scientific fact that no one can remember what it's like being a fetus anyways. So if I have to put myself into the shoes of a fetus, I'd also just not know about my current life and just have fate thesame way my potential siblings have who died before they entered the egg.

I help poor people out of abundance not for my detriment. But you know, if abortion actually was legal, then less poor, homeless and mentally ill people would occur.

Then explain condoms and birth controls then? You're making that guarantee up. Maybe you're just living under a rock if you don't know how those preventions work.

I agree prevention is better than cure and I don't support sex being taken for granted. I'd also support more condoms and birth controlls if ever they'd wanna have sex but again, what you still fail to realize that no matter what you do, there's a risk to everything. So having sex while using protection isn't really any different. You wanna go out? There's virus. You're risking your life but that doesn't mean you can't stay home forever.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Just a reminder, i'm not accepting your claim saying that a fetus is a "someone" which tend to be thesame argument you keep using. You pretty much have nothing else.

[Cubus]

"I speak for other pro choices also yeah I can speak for everyone."

Did you ask someone?

"So if I have to put myself into the shoes of a fetus, I'd also just not know about my current life"

I am pretty sure no one remembers being killed and you use this as an argument.

"But you know, if abortion actually was legal, then less poor, homeless and mentally ill people would occur."

That's actually not true, because in my country abortion on request is illegal, and we have way less poor, homeless and mentally ill people than where it is legal.

"You wanna go out? There's virus. You're risking your life but that doesn't mean you can't stay home forever."

You can catch a virus even if you stay home. You can get it from your parents/sister/brother/wife/kids etc. Getting pregnant only depends on you.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Yeah and not only I can provide anecdotes, science says so themselves. Non of us remember or know what it's like being a fetus.

Everyone else except for a fetus know what it's like being alive so that's still what stands. Fetus still don't know what it's like to be a live.

If you wanna use your country as an example then I can use another country such as Canada being a pro choice country yet one happy and developed country. But I can't conclude that everything has to do with being a pro life or a pro choice. If you say your country is happy and pro life, it may not be because it's a pro life country. As i've even asked you what benefits they get, you're even dodging that question by saying it doesn't matter because ethics matter more.

You know, a girl can also get pregnant without any consent like being raped even if she's staying at home right? You've actually proven my point here. Anything you do and even if you're staying at home, there are always risks. So there isn't any different if they're gonna have sex and prevent pregnancy.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I can see you're already starting to run out of credibility here with your dry responses. Might as well just argue at your level at this point.

[Cubus]

"Non of us remember or know what it's like being a fetus."

And so what? Womb is full of water. You can't make any sounds there.

"Everyone else except for a fetus know what it's like being alive so that's still what stands. Fetus still don't know what it's like to be a live."

Ok, and so what?

"If you wanna use your country as an example then I can use another country such as Canada being a pro choice country yet one happy and developed country. "

Canada still has a lot more poor and homeless people, than my country.

"If you say your country is happy and pro life, it may not be because it's a pro life country."

You just contradicted yourself.

"You know, a girl can also get pregnant without any consent like being raped even if she's staying at home right? "

I don't talk about rape cases. I talk about cases when you want to kill your baby just because you were irresponsible

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus And that's another difference you've given. It is still inside of a womb so we can't see it. So what you say? I can just say "so what if you think it's a someone?"

And it's only a coincidence that your country is actually surrounded by developed rich countries which are actually pro choice. You get all the countries in Europe and also includes New Zealand, Canada and Australia. And it's also a coincidence that pro life countries tend to be those under developed countries with high crime and poverty rate such as Indonesia, Philippines, Brazil, Other countries in the tropics and Africa. reproductiverights.org/.../ You can check the map right now So you've just been giving anecdotes just based on one's view

You don't wanna talk about rape because you don't wanna try to at least make an exception here even tho that is one factor is to why someone get unwanted pregnancy. So if accidents happen, that means they're irresponsible right? What if your son got killed at a party with his friends because? He just wanted to have fun so he attended. So your son was irresponsible then? If that's the case, you must have a pretty boring life living under a rock because you'd pretty much be "irresponsible" if anything happens.

And you know what? Talking about responsibilities, I'd also like to say abortion would be a responsible thing to do. To "kill" a fetus is also to stop it from growing up burdened and a burden to multiple people. If it was an "irresponsible" thing to not be careful when having sex then it's a responsible thing to fix that issue.

[Cubus]

" It is still inside of a womb so we can't see it. "

So what about it?

"And it's only a coincidence that your country is actually surrounded by developed rich countries"

Such as Belarus or Ukraine which are very poor.

"You get all the countries in Europe "

You insinuate that my country is not in Europe?

"And it's also a coincidence that pro life countries tend to be those under developed countries"

Do you insinuate that my country is underdeveloped?

"with high crime"

My country actually has much less crime than pro choice countries such as Great Britain, France or Sweden.
Nothing's better to manipulate the data to fir your thesis, isn't it? :)

"What if your son got killed at a party with his friends because? He just wanted to have fun so he attended. So your son was irresponsible then?"

That's a completely different case. If you go to the party you don't expect to be killed. If you have sex you expect you can get pregnant. Compare how many people are killed at parties and how many people get pregnant after having sex.

" I'd also like to say abortion would be a responsible thing to do."

"To "kill" a fetus is also to stop it from growing up burdened and a burden to multiple people. "

If you assume every child is a bourden then there's something really bad with your world perception. You need help.

"If it was an "irresponsible" thing to not be careful when having sex then it's a responsible thing to fix that issue."

Killing someone is never a fix.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus You're not giving any elaborations anymore so I'll just argue at your level at this point

And so what about if you think it's a somebody?

Your surrounding country in Europe and they're not even limited to just Ukraine and Belarus. We also have Spain, U. K., Finland, France, Germany and so on. You're cherry picking on those poor pro choice countries.

I'm generally speaking. You think exceptions don't exist?

Then I can just say that case involves the same principle. Someone can have sex and expect to not get pregnant because of all the protections they're using.

You assume that they don't.

Killing "someone" is a fix.

[Cubus]

It doesn not matter that you can't see inside a womb. It's not a trait that defines life.

"Your surrounding country in Europe and they're not even limited to just Ukraine and Belarus. We also have Spain, U. K., Finland, France, Germany and so on."

You said "surrounded". My country is surrounded by pretty poor countries like Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania or Ukraine. Only Germany and maybe Czech Republic are rich. It's like saying USA is surrounded by Latin American countries, because you border with Mexico.

"Then I can just say that case involves the same principle. Someone can have sex and expect to not get pregnant because of all the protections they're using."

The chances of getting pregnant while having sex during ovulation is 30%. The chances of getting killed while going to a party are close to 0. You really put it into the same cattegory?

"Killing "someone" is a fix."

Nope it's not. Would you kill your neighbour, because he is a bourden to you?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus It doesn't matter if you think it's it wrong to kill something inside of a womb.

Surrounded doesn't only mean you're neighboring countries. But that's still beside's the point. I'm still talking about the entire Europe that which surrounds poland. Latin America is at the south of USA not at the North, South, East and West. That's still besides the point. Other than European countries, we also got a very well disciplined and developed country like Singapore and New Zealand to be a pro choice which still stands.

The chances of getting pregnant varies on how much protection is used just like the chances of getting killed in a party varies on what kind of party they're attending. So yeah I put it on thesame cathegory. As i've said, everything you do has risks.

Then yes it is. No because they're not a fetus.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus However I can punish them or give them a life sentence if they cross the line of the law. You might say a fetus is "innocent" except for the fact that it's causing the mother pain inside of her womb. Inflicting pain to someone is punishable by law. Not necessarily death penalty but if you choose to preform any sort of punishment to a fetus, you'd let it grow and punish it as a toddler. But that would be unethical. Aborting it would just be.

[Cubus]

"It doesn't matter if you think it's it wrong to kill something inside of a womb."

I'll bounce it back. It doesn't matter you think it is good to kill an unborn baby.

"I'm still talking about the entire Europe that which surrounds poland. Latin America is at the south of USA not at the North, South, East and West."

Just like countries you talk about are only to the West of Poland and not to the South, East, or North.

"The chances of getting pregnant varies on how much protection is used just like the chances of getting killed in a party varies on what kind of party they're attending"

30% is for sex without protection. With protection it's like 2%. Still way more than getting killed at a party.

[Cubus]

"You might say a fetus is "innocent" except for the fact that it's causing the mother pain inside of her womb. "

Seems mum agreed for having pain if she agreed to have unprotected sex on fertile days.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus I'll bounce it back. It doesn't matter if you think it's it wrong to kill something inside of a womb.

That's still besides the point.

With even more extra protection, it's gonna be less that getting killed at a party.

Then that would be the case for those who actually planed for conception. Those who don't plan would just use protection most of the time.

[Cubus]

"Then that would be the case for those who actually planed for conception. Those who don't plan would just use protection most of the time."

You just answered yourself.

You can't get pregnant outside a few days a months and even then you can use protection. And EVEN if you don't you only have 30% of chance to get pregnant.

Looking at this, it's actually very hard to get pregnant, even if you want to. You have to be really irreponsible to get pregnant if you don't want to

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus "Those who don't plan would just use protection most of the time." So they're not planning for conceptions.

And if it's very hard to get pregnant, which is why people have sex for it's own benefits. But that still doesn't exactly mean accidents don't happen. After all, they already have their own consequences for abortion such the side effects like getting hormonal imbalances, the risk of actually dying during the process and the cost. So there's no need to include the laws for it. Unless you're just a supremacist with your own point of view.

[Cubus]

"So they're not planning for conceptions."

No, and this is the way you may limit abortions. Although it's not as good as some people claim it is.

But that still doesn't exactly mean accidents don't happen.

That's why you shouldn't have sex if you don't have a fairly decent job.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Yes and you are just making assumptions that they plan for it only to abort it.

Then that's why you should just go to a party then. Also that's why we use condoms and protections.

[Cubus]

Actually surveys show that most people have abortion just because they want to have unprotected sex and not because they cannot afford a baby. It has nothing to do with bringing a baby to a brutal world.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Then I just say that surveys shows that people aren't honest all the time. But even if it's unprotected, I'm still for abortion just like all those very well developed countries I talked about which you've purposely overlooked by focusing on the "surrounding countries" which is besides the point.

[Cubus]

"Then I just say that surveys shows that people aren't honest all the time. "

Then this whole discussion doesn;t make sense because you can deny everything.

" I'm still for abortion just like all those very well developed countries I talked about which you've purposely overlooked by focusing on the "surrounding countries""

I actually talk about all surrounding countries. Not only about countries that are to the West and ignoring other directions.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus It doesn't take a genius and you've also been denying everthing

That's still besides the point i was making. When I was talking about abortion being beneficial and could potentially reduce the homelessness, poverty and mental illness, I bring those very well developed countries up which you've completely ignored. And I'm not only limiting that discussion to Europe which Poland is at the center (with a bit more to the east) of it. So you wanna focus on the surroundings instead and ignore the rest just to downplay everything else?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I'm not concluding them being pro choice makes them developed but it's still a coincidence which supports my claims. You wanna focus on geographical locations? Ok but that's off topic.

[Cubus]

"It doesn't take a genius and you've also been denying everthing"

Me, unlike you, don't question reliable sources.

"When I was talking about abortion being beneficial and could potentially reduce the homelessness, poverty and mental illness"

My country doesn;t have neither abortion nor homeless people. Your country has abortions and has a problem with homeless people. Everyone that uses his or her brain at at least 2% would be able to connect two dots.

"And I'm not only limiting that discussion to Europe which Poland is at the center (with a bit more to the east) of it."

You're only limiting it to the countries that are to the left of that center, completely ignoring other parts of Europe.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Me, unlike you, actually has reliable back ups for my claims

I'm still talking about generally speaking and your and my country don't represent the demographic as a whole.

When I included new zealand iand singapore in this topic, your logic falls right there. And also, ignore the rest of Europe? They're all pretty much pro choice so how could I ignore them?

[Cubus]

"When I included new zealand iand singapore in this topic, your logic falls right there."

Why would it fall? Nothing falls :)

" ignore the rest of Europe? They're all pretty much pro choice so how could I ignore them?"

Do you have any proofs that countries in Eastern or Southern Europe are pro killing?

You're making a big mistake of thinking all Europe is like Germany, France and Great Britain. Which is a big no-no. It's like saying all the USA looks like New York.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Your logic falls for claiming i was only talking about your surrounding countries.

If you strawman pro choice as pro killing then I strawman pro life as pro sadism. We pro choice like to give people choice to abort also give them the choice to keep their fetuses. Unlike you putting laws for our point of views. And here's that proof reproductiverights.org/.../ Why don't you check the demographics again?

When did I say all Europe is thesame? Im just saying that all of Europe are pro choice and i'd say they tend to be more developed and rich en.wikipedia.org/.../Economy_of_Europe Again im speaking in generality here

[Cubus]

"We pro choice like to give people choice to abort "

What choice do unborn kids have?

" Im just saying that all of Europe are pro choice and i'd say they tend to be more developed and rich"

One does not link to other. If you knew anything about Europe, you would know why Eastern and Southern Europe has legal abortion.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus The mother gets the choice but the fetus don't because they are not a "someone".

Well greatminds just think alike. And for whatever reason they have supporting pro-choice, there's a big i would pretty much agree.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

*Big chance

[Cubus]

"The mother gets the choice but the fetus don't because they are not a "someone"."

It is. Personhood is properly defined by membership in the human species. Umborn child belong to a human species (homo sapiens sapiens)

"Well greatminds just think alike. And for whatever reason they have supporting pro-choice, there's a big i would pretty much agree."

The case is - they didn't. They were imposed to them by totalitarian, communist regimes after World War II.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

It still doesn't have a reputation for it is not a someone and if you consider it a "someone", that is still your point of view.

I am not just making a conclusion that that is the only reason why they are a pro choice. And by the way we still have northern Europe to cover.

[Cubus]

"It still doesn't have a reputation for it is not a someone and if you consider it a "someone", that is still your point of view."

You just made a double negation.

So you actually agree with what I say :)

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then you've also made a double negation.

Then you've agreed with being a pro choice.

[Cubus]

I didn't. You dis.

Do you actually know what double negation is?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Then I didn't made a double negation, you dis.

Do you even know what you're saying?

[Cubus]

"doesn't have a reputation for it is not a someone "

Which translates ti "has a reputation for it is a someone" because you used a double negation. - and - together give a +

[Aiko_E_Lara]

"because you're murdering a child"

Which translates ti "has a reputation for it is a someone" because you used a double negation. - and - together give a +

[Aiko_E_Lara]

"because you're murdering a child"

Which translates ti "it is a fetus for it is a someone" because you used a double negation. - and - together give a +

[Cubus]

You don't want to respond to my comment I see.

It seems I won :)

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And you dont wanna respond to my question i see seems i won! (And also the fact that you have also been dodging te rest of lots of my points)

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I mean i can just say that i have won ages ago and you have been screwed the moment you came to my thread

[Cubus]

I responded to all of your questions.

Your last question is just a copy of my comment

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Then I responded to all of your answers

Your last comment is just something you made up.

[Cubus]

"because you're murdering a child

Which translates ti "it is a fetus for it is a someone" because you used a double negation. - and - together give a +"

That comment doesn;t make any sense neither logically nor gramatically

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus "doesn't have a reputation for it is not a someone "

Which translates ti "has a reputation for it is a someone" because you used a double negation. - and - together give a +

That comment doesn;t make any sense neither logically nor gramatically

[Cubus]

You won't win any argument by just copying your interlocutor's comment.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus You won't win any argument by just saying random things and dodge questions

[Cubus]

Says someone who actually dodges questions.

I reply to your questions. Not like you at the moment.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Says someone who actually dodges responses.

I reply to debunked your responses not like you at the moment.

[Cubus]

Proofs?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Proofs?

[Cubus]

You still didn't respond to the fact that you used a double negative,

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus And you still didn't prove the double negation

[Cubus]

I did 23 hours ago

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus then i did it 23 hours and 5 minutes ago.

[Cubus]

Do you have a proof?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Do you have proof?

[Cubus]

I actually do, and I listed it before.

You used a double negation here.

"It still doesn't have a reputation for it is not a someone"

With one negation it would be

"It still does have a reputation for it is not a someone"

With double negation (because in logic two minuses together give a plus) it is:

"It still does have a reputation for it is a someone"

So, by using double negation you agreed with me that an unborn kid is "a someone" :)

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus I actually do, and I listed it before

You used a double negation here

"Because you're murdering someone"

With one negation it would be

"Because you're not murdering someone"

With double negation (because in logic two minuses together give a plus) it is:

"Because you're not murdering someone"

So, by using double negation you agreed with me that an unborn kid is not "someone"

(It's either you're putting words on my mouth or you're focusing so much on my typo when I never meant to say a fetus has a reputation just to give yourself an excuse to "prove" something you've made up)

[Aiko_E_Lara]

So there for I did exactly what you're doing

[Cubus]

There's no negation in "Because you're murdering someone".

According to definition:
"In English grammar, negation is a grammatical construction that contradicts (or negates) all or part of the meaning of a sentence. Also known as a negative construction or standard negation.

In standard English, negative clauses and sentences commonly include the negative particle not or the contracted negative n't. Other negative words include no, none, nothing, nobody, nowhere, and never.

In many cases, a negative word can be formed by adding the prefix un- to the positive form of a word (as in unhappy and undecided). Other negative affixes (called negators) include a-, de-, dis-, in-, -less, and mis-."

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Then there's no negation in "It still doesn't have a reputation for it is not a someone"

Then you basically explained your statement.

[Cubus]

There is, because you used "doesn't" and "not". Seems you can;t see this

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus There is a "murder" and "fetus is someone" Seems you can't see this

[Cubus]

Where do you see "n't" "not" or negative prefixes there?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Where do you see something that matters in there? If I say "I can't be sadist" that's something negative then.

[Cubus]

In the sentence ""I can't be sadist"" there is a negation, but in the previous sentence you refer to, there is none.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Well you're statement still gives a negative result anyways. I could say i can't be a sadist which has a negation but it is a positive result

[Cubus]

It doesn't matter what gives. What matters is that your previous sentence doesn;t have a double negation grammatical construction.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus It doesn't matter what negation you think about the sentence. What matters is point of views.

[Cubus]

So it doesn't matter for you that you actually agreed with me by double negation? :)

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I've been doing that to argue at your level because you've been doing thesame thing focusing on something irrelevant instead of the main point. And sure i agree but what i said about the results of my statement being positive still stands up i have already talked about the benefits which you like to ignore.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And if you have nothing to say about it, i can just conclude that you basically agreed with me.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Just like "i don't consider it a someone so it is not murder" which basically give a positive result just like all the other developed countries i mentioned with all the benefits they have for healthy society. Sure you can cherry-pick those terrible countries all you want but i can just say that it's hardly a coincidence if most of the pro choice countries are actually developed.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

It's a double negation but i don't agree about how you over analyze statements just so you can ignore the rest. If you want to make conclusions like that can i can conclude that you agreed with the rest what i said

[Cubus]

"I've been doing that to argue at your level because you've been doing thesame thing focusing on something irrelevant instead of the main point."

I already debunked you on the main point and you can't bring anything new so it's a lost cause for you.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And i have debunked how you debunk the main point which is why you keep bringing up the negations and make cherry pick conclusions and you cannot bring anything new that's why you lost.

[Cubus]

Do you have proofs?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Do you have proofs?

[Cubus]

You make a claim. You have to prove it.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You had also made claims you. have to prove it

[Cubus]

You said that "you keep bringing up the negations and make cherry pick conclusions and you cannot bring anything new"

You have to prove it because you stated this not me

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus you said you have already debunked on the main point and i can't bring anything new for it a lost for me so you have to prove it

[Cubus]

Show me what you debunked

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Show me what you debunked

[Cubus]

For example your claim that the unborn child is just a bunch of cells and you are not

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus For example, your claim saying a fetus is a someone despite it's only a point of view.

[Cubus]

I also debunked it. Human is a human after the sperm and egg combine, because after that it can grow and not before it.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus I also debunked it using social science and having it's own specific term being a human fetus which is different from a human baby despite all falling under the "human" category and it still doesn't have a reputation.

[Cubus]

It's still a human.

Contrary to what you belive there's no such thing as "fetus" species.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

That still doesn't make it a someone because it doesn't have a reputation. And it's a human "fetus" not a human "being"

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You can have many other reasons to consider it a someone but one can just only use one of the many reasons. Just like it only takes you to be a rapist to be considered a criminal despite how "good, rich and handsome" you are.

[Cubus]

- Human doesn't need to have a reputation to be a human

-Human fetus is also a human being

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then i can also say human beings need to have a reputation which a human fetus doesn't

Human fetus is not a human being

[Cubus]

Definition: an entity of rational nature. It can be a human, as well as God, understood as a being distinguished by the most perfect form of existence. Originally, in both Greek and Latin, the word meant "the mask" made by actors in the ancient theater. Subsequently, it began to be treated as a role that merits in the drama of life. In the contemporary philosophy of the concept, key words for Christian and non-Christian personalism, having its source in the Christian (especially Thomistic) man as a being separate from the world of things, nature, including animals.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

"it can be" also means it "can not be" which is why your current argument is argumentum ad temperantiam. Also because not everyone are Christians

[Cubus]

""it can be" also means it "can not be" which is why your current argument is argumentum ad temperantiam. "

- Can is used as an enumeration. so nope.

"Also because not everyone are Christians"

One does not have to be. It is stated that it applies both to Christian and non-Christian personalism.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus Can doesn't also mean guaranteed.

I can also just say they don't have to be atheists to be pro choice either

[Cubus]

"Can doesn't also mean guaranteed."

It seems you didn't read my previous comment

"I can also just say they don't have to be atheists to be pro choice either"

They don't have to. There is a rock singer in my country who is an atheist and against abortion. But that's not important

You focus on these elements of the definitions that are the least important as there are either examples or origin.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Cubus "Looks can be deceiving" is different to "Looks are deceiving" You didn't read my previous comment

Well there is also a christian here who's a pro choice. Anecdotes shmanecdotes.

You focus on what you think is important which which is in your point of view and isn't that important in our point of view.

[Cubus]

"Looks can be deceiving" is not an enumeration.

Then that person is not a good Christian, as Christianity is against abortion. And this has nothing to do with anty abortion Atheism, because Atheists can believe whatever they want on that topic and are not obliged by religion.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

In your perspective of what christianity should be. Amish people also think they're christianity is superior and everyone but them are not good christians. So it is still your point of view.

[Cubus]

I may not be a good Amish and I'm ok with that because I do not claim to be Amish, so it doesn't matter for me.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

The holy roman empire also thought they were good christians for crucifying anyone who don't believe in god but that is just their point of view just like your anti-abortion agenda

[Cubus]

You mistaken Roman empires.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Mistake or not, that still doesn't remove the fact that it is a point of view. And sure so what if we aren't christians? That doesn't mean we can't have opinions about it like you do

[Cubus]

If you aren;t Christians then it doesn't matter. If you read my previous comments you would know

[Cubus]

"Christians" not "christians" dude, Followers of a religion are written with a capital letter

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Yeah it doesn't matter because it is still your point of view. Christians can still be a pro choice. I actually consider myself a Christian whether you like it or not. But in the end i know that religion is just how anyone just want it to be

[Cubus]

Then it means you won't follow what the Bible says.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Oh sure i'm not following everything what the bible said. You may not consider me a Christian but that still doesn't matter

[Akam93]

It's not my choice. The father of my baby I'm carrying should have a say so. But I think it should illegal. Killing unborn babies watching their little hands and feet be taken apart from the doctor and then throwing its body in a garbage can like its trash.

[Christsdisciple15]

I am against it morally and spiritually but I don’t see how we can implement legislation surrounding it? do you think if we make it illegal abortions will stop? I don’t think they will, I just think they’ll happen using more unsafe methods… I don't know

[AaronKrieger]

It should be legal, but I do think it's silly to not acknowledge that you are taking a human life and it should be treated seriously

[exitseven]

It should be legal but somebody needs to scientifically figure out when the fetus becomes a sentient being. I think it is more that 6 weeks but it is much less than 10 minutes before the due date.

[msc545]

Define "Being" and also define "sentient" please

[exitseven]

@msc545 can it feel pain.

[msc545]

Many plants can feel pain by that definition

[exitseven]

@msc545 how do you know a plant can feel pain?

[msc545]

It will retreat from noxious stimuli.

[Anonymous]

^^^ This

[Anonymous]

In the vast majority of abortions, it is a mother choosing to kill her child as a matter of convenience. That is an indisputable fact. Those are my thoughts on abortion.

[Cubus]

Abortion is a murder and murder should be illegal. The only exception should be to save mother's life.

[najekim]

Personally, I'm neutral on the subject for obvious reasons. But it should be available for anyone who wishes to obtain that medical procedure.

[mommymommymommy]

Never tell a woman what she can and can't do. You will regret it. I guarantee you

[Twalli]

I believe you should prove that you could adopt before you can reproduce.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Against for the exception of incest, rape or medical emergency.

[msc545]

How does committing a second crime or murder somehow nullify the original crimes of rape or incest?

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

@msc545: The abortion must happen as soon it's as she's aware of the pregnancy.

It's not right to force a woman to have a child of a person that sexually violated.

[msc545]

So murder is less of a crime than forcing "a woman to have a child of a person that sexually violated." ?

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

@msc545: You're not going to change my mind.

A woman should have the right to terminate the pregnancy of a the seed of her rapist as soon a pregnancy is detected.

No baby body parts haven't been formed yet.

[msc545]

I know I won't change your mind but it is an interesting discussion nonetheless. What do you mean by "No baby body parts haven't been formed yet" ?

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

@msc545: The abortion will not take place once the fetus has developed into flesh.

It must happen very early because after a certain point I will not support abortion.

[msc545]

Define flesh, please. When do you think this transformation occurs and why?

[Anonymous]

Extremely few, if any, women die while giving birth. One of the worst sins in the eyes of God, is the murdering of innocent unborn babies

[DaisyM23]

yes the same God who killed firstborn sons in Egypt, who killed everyone but Noah and 2 of each animal and who says unfaithful women would miscarry? people like to pick and choose from religious material

[Cubus]

@DaisyM23 God killed everyone except Noah, because they were sinfull. Sin kills you.

[DaisyM23]

@Cubus so you're telling me that every single 'good' christian (or any other religion) has lived a completely sinless life? no pride, envy, anger, greed etc?

[Cubus]

@DaisyM23 Nope. Noah was said to be the only one.

[Cubus]

@DaisyM23 "Christian" not "christian". That's how you write names of followers of religion.

[Gentleman900]

Im a Christian so, its a sin.

[Iron_Man]

I’m pro life

[msc545]

Thank you!

[Iron_Man]

@msc545 yes, of course always pro life

[msc545]

MURDER

[LimitedBenefits101]

Its murder.

[sirderpsalot123]

Not my business