Trump is less popular than Ford and Carter. He’s an anomaly as we speak. With all the positive economic news coming out, we have seen little reflection in the polls.
You might think that’s clever, but you make my point.
You DID look like that. Yet you were not an elephant. You were no less a human life then as you are now.
Lol…
You don’t even know what the constituency you are advocating for looks like.
1 Like
This is a smokescreen. Lots of mammalian embryos look alike early on. You know that. I know you know that. And you know that I know that.
In other threads you pretended to seek honest debate. Now you’re pulling this game.
It’s your way of trying to dance away from the actual point of the matter. You were the same human life at that stage as you are now. Your disingenuousness won’t change that.
So you agree that there is nothing distinctly “human” about a mammalian embryo?
It is not disingenuous at all.
It is an illustration that what is being advocated for is not understood well enough by those advocates to even be able to identify clearly what they want to protect.
This then gets confused by rallies showing late term pregnancies in an attempt to make a clear comparison to fetal development in the first weeks.
Those are the people who are making a disingenuous argument… not me.
I recognize that fetal development is just that… development and a fetus at six weeks is miles away from a fetus at eight months.
Are you asking me that? After what I wrote, asking that questions tells me you’re not paying attention. (Or you’re being deliberately obtuse.)
It’s DNA is distinctly human!
It absolutely is.
I’ll repeat: You were no less human at that stage than you are now. You were the same human life then as you are now, and you will be until you die.
Not in its humanity.
The principle of appearance you are attempting to use is the same as some people used to support enslavement of blacks. It was odious back then, and it is odious now.
A fetus at six weeks lacks all of the physical components that would give it humanity.
It lacks the physical structures that would make it anything that we would recognize as “human”
It has human DNA, the blue print for further development, but it doesn’t have “humanity” yet.
Something the size of a pea that lacks a brain, heart and lungs is not the same as an fetus in the eighth month of development.
That’s just ignorant justification for demanding the right to kill one’s own child.
Right. It’s an elephant.
The point is that it isn’t a child yet.
When it is viable that is when it is a child.
When it is viable, then the justification for abortion becomes much much harder.
Until viability though the woman’s moral right to self autonomy is superior.
That is what is so frustrating about this debate.
I recognize both the rights for a woman’s ownership of her own body and the fetus’s right to life and that there can be a conflict there.
You don’t recognize that conflict because you don’t recognize a right.
Of course it is. It is already created. It exists. It’s the offspring of the mother and father.
What you really should be saying is that you don’t value that particular human life.
That conflict exists because you need justification for abortion.
I recognize the right to life as paramount to other rights. Without that protection of that right, no other rights can even exist if you’re dead.
How is responding to every post “it’s killing a child” having a debate?
Just like all those fertilized eggs in the dumpster at the IVF clinic. Does this similarly disgust you?
It’s a fact. It’s honest.
Pretending the fetus is some creature other than a human is more than just debatable. It’s dishonest.
Surely you’re not going to hop onto the elephant bandwagon too! (Right?)
It has human dna but it is not a “child”.
Absolutely, it does. I had a good discussion about that in one of the other abortion threads in the past few days.
It exists. It’s the offspring of the mother and father.
It’s a child.
But use whatever wordsmithing you need to justify your right to kill your own child.
