Originally posted by Stigma
Huh... Ben Shapiro debunks Pro-Choicer's argument.Starts at 2:15 mark:
👆
/thread
No surprise, Ben Shapiro is intellectually honest. 👆
I disagree with him on many things, but I can never call him insincere.
Originally posted by Stigma
Huh... Ben Shapiro debunks Pro-Choicer's argument.Starts at 2:15 mark:
👆
/thread
No surprise, Ben Shapiro is intellectually honest. 👆
I disagree with him on many things, but I can never call him insincere.
Originally posted by Robtard
You'd be correct if we ignored that intent is a HUGE factor in our legal system, otherwise there would be no separation between the crime of Manslaughter and First Degree Murder as an example. When in reality and because of intent, the later carries a very much heavier penalty.
Originally posted by Robtard
The car scenario was just an example of intent and it's legal ramifications; which is the issue/point, do continue to ignore that and do your pretend wins.
And you quoted me specifically saying I do not like pro choicers who decide if its a life or not based on the circumstances of demise lol.
So why would you pick that quote to give your asinine example to?
Let me say again: either it's a life or it isn't. It does not magically become a life if someone else kills it, but if momma does it's just a bunch of cells.
And I'm talking more about the stupidity of some pro choicers views.
The point: Intent factors in when something is a crime or is not a crime or is a lesser crime or is a greater crime. It's why a person can kill another person and get off free or life in prison or something in between. Your myopia won't change that.
So you're just going to have to keep your gut-punching of pregnant women fetish as a fantasy. Maybe write your congressman.
Originally posted by Robtard
The point: Intent factors in when something is a crime or is not a crime or is a lesser crime or is a greater crime. Your myopia won't change that.So you're just going to have to keep your gut-punching of pregnant women fetish as a fantasy. Maybe write your congressman.
And with intent, if you consider it a life...snuffing out the life because you were dumb and irresponsible is no better intent than some dude who just wants to punch a pregnant lady.
But that isn't my point. Either it's a life or it is not. If they do not consider it a life then it can't be killed, no matter who destroys it.
I feel like I'm being pretty clear here: you don't get to dictate whether or not it is a life based on WHO kills it. That is insanity.
Originally posted by Surtur
And with intent, if you consider it a life...snuffing out the life because you were dumb and irresponsible is no better intent than some dude who just wants to punch a pregnant lady.But that isn't my point. Either it's a life or it is not. If they do not consider it a life then it can't be killed, no matter who destroys it.
I feel like I'm being pretty clear here: you don't get to dictate whether or not it is a life based on WHO kills it. That is insanity.
As noted above, it's why someone can kill another person and they could get off free, life in prison or something in between; we don't have just one sentence for killing a person, there are many factors. Same applies to other laws obvs. I do like how you're back to exposing your true motive of always blanket blaming the woman as "dumb and irresponsible". Anyhow, intent.
Intent, lawfulness and unlawfulness say otherwise. That's how the legal system works.
The only one trying to dictate something here is you, sport.
This is a somewhat silly thread. Life begins at conception... No life began before that as both the eggs and sperm are living cells, the zygote and early stages of development are merely a shared diploid life. They are not in anyway a developed human and often self-abort anyway, sad for parents trying to have children as that may be. Every time Surtur wanks he is aborting his genetic potential to procreate... hurrah! Present laws re: abortion are just about right.
Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
This is a somewhat silly thread. Life begins at conception... No life began before that as both the eggs and sperm are living cells, the zygote and early stages of development are merely a shared diploid life. They are not in anyway a developed human and often self-abort anyway, sad for parents trying to have children as that may be. Every time Surtur wanks he is aborting his genetic potential to procreate... hurrah! Present laws re: abortion are just about right.
^ Reasonable
Originally posted by juggerman
I don't think Christians believe embryos are equal to born babies, just that they are human life and shouldn't be killed. So if a child is considered a 10 and an embryo is considered an 8 then they should care about the child first but they still care about the embryo. It's just a different level. Same as saving the elderly vs children
That is precisely what they claim to believe. That is why they refer to embryos as "pre-born" people. It is the entire premise of their anti-abortion and anti-euthanasia arguments. They do not believe in levels of personhood or value. In fact, that is one of the charges they make against people who are Pro-Choice, that they believe some human lives are more important than others. Stop dancing.