Bill Nye to Anti-Abortionists: "You Literally Don't Know What You're Talking About"

Listened to the video of his "logic".

Not exactly a ground breaking, parading-shifting argument here. But I guess that's what is to be expected as he really was arguing with the weakest points of the pro-life side of the debate.

Addressing his "point" posted on the website.

“Many, many more hundreds of eggs are fertilized than become humans,” he says, because not all of those eggs will attach to a woman’s uterine wall and result in pregnancy. But if you’re going to hold that as a standard—that life begins at conception and any egg that’s fertilized has the same rights as an individual—well, “Whom do you sue? Whom do you throw in jail?”

Fertilized eggs that don't "attach"? That's just nature. We can't hate nature nor can we blame the egg as well as the woman's body for behaving as nature intends. The same way we don't blame the parents when there is a miscarriage. Or blame anyone when a person dies of natural causes. Not exactly a stellar point there.

Again- we try to minimise miscarriages and we fight against death by natural causes.

No-one gives a damn about unattached eggs- nor will they ever. No-one has the psychological attitude that these are lives that need protecting. Hence his logic is good; the position of some pro-lifers that life begins at fertilisation is arbitrary, not rational, based more on an emotional attachment. If it really was held that fertilisation creates a moral life form, these people would be wanting those eggs saved too. But they don't; the feel is not there.

His point cannot simply be dismissed in that way.

I don't get the logic. Either life begins in conception or it does not. How people react to a loss of life at whatever stage of development has no bearings on the above assertion. If one wanted to prove that a fertilized egg isn't life shouldn't the direction be to enumerate scientifically-accepted criteria for what defines life?

Or is what you are saying is that the standard pro-life stance of life at conception is a hypocritical notion that uses arbitrary criteria?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I don't get the logic. Either life begins in conception or it does not.

well there's your problem right there: false dilemma.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
well there's your problem right there: false dilemma.

Explain. Are you talking some sort of median form state of semi-life here? I don't get it.

A False Dilemma is basically a "this or that" argument, when there could be more than the two.

The counter to what you said could be: What if life begins after conception? What if life begins before conception? What if life begins after birth? What if life begins at age 4? etc.

you insist on having a line drawn when none is appropriate, unless you wish to pretend that a single embryonic cell is just as significant as a fully formed and conscious fetus. part of finding a solution is to let go of such a ridiculous grounds for even opening up the discussion.

Originally posted by Nibedicus

Or is what you are saying is that the standard pro-life stance of life at conception is a hypocritical notion that uses arbitrary criteria?

Originally posted by Robtard
A False Dilemma is basically a "this or that" argument, when there could be more than the two.

Edit. "Answer" and not "counter" is actually a more appropriate presentation of my response:

The answers to what you asked would be:

What if life begins after conception?

Then it doesn't begin at conception.

What if life begins before conception?

Doesn't make sense. How can life begin before conception? But yes, it also means it doesn't begin at conception.

What if life begins after birth?

Then it doesn't begin at conception.

What if life begins at age 4?

Then it doesn't begin at conception.

This is not a false dilemma as much as saying "either it is alive or it isn't."

Again, explain your point.

i think i explained well enough, and i also suspect that you are intelligent enough to grasp it.

if you need to keep trying to turn your personal arbitrary line into universal truth, good luck.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i think i explained well enough, and i also suspect that you are intelligent enough to grasp it.

if you need to keep trying to turn your personal arbitrary line into universal truth, good luck.

I realize you're not very bright and therefore, aren't able to explain anything intelligibly, but there's no need to get emotional and defensive. Nib's request is quite reasonable.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
The counter to what you said could be:

What if life begins after conception?

Then it doesn't begin at conception.

What if life begins before conception?

Doesn't make sense. How can life begin before conception? But yes, it also means it doesn't begin at conception.

What if life begins after birth?

Then it doesn't begin at conception.

What if life begins at age 4?

Then it doesn't begin at conception.

This is not a false dilemma as much as saying "either it is alive or it isn't."

Again, explain your point.

Originally posted by Robtard
I think life begins at 24 weeks. See?

Then (to you) it doesn't begin at conception.

What's your point?

Originally posted by psmith81992
I realize you're not very bright and therefore, aren't able to explain anything intelligibly, but there's no need to get emotional and defensive. Nib's request is quite reasonable.

you're just a one trick pony, aint you?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Then (to you) it doesn't begin at conception.

What's your point?

That this argument is rendered pointless by the fact that you have differing opinions at what "conception" is.

you're just a one trick pony, aint you?

you need to get over your obsessive fixation with me.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Then (to you) it doesn't begin at conception.

What's your point?

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
you need to get over your obsessive fixation with me.

Originally posted by Robtard
I see the problem, I took your statement as "life begins at conception or life simply does not begin at all".

Ah. Well, it's not.

Originally posted by psmith81992
You continue responding to me. Quit while you're behind and move on 👆

that's nice dear.

Originally posted by Robtard
I see the problem, I took your statement as "life begins at conception or life simply does not begin at all".

well that's supposed to be our conclusion