Chew Toy Apologetic*

[radvermin]

The decision falls to the person inside whom the other human is living.
And only that person.

Not only do I not have an opinion, I don't see myself as having the right to one.
Do I think that abortion is bad? No.
Do I think it's good? No.

Do you know what you're talking about? No.
I'm not saying that as an insult, but as a logical deduction from your responses. It seems you are secular, you believe you could be wrong about everything you claim to know, which means you don't know anything*... including what you're talking about.
I've been down this road too many times.

*An agnostic could be wrong about a given topic. Agnostic literally means "I don't know".

 

[shnarkle]

Do you know what you're talking about? No.
I'm not saying that as an insult, but as a logical deduction from your responses. It seems you are secular, you believe you could be wrong about everything you claim to know, which means you don't know anything*... including what you're talking about.
I've been down this road too many times.

*An agnostic could be wrong about a given topic. Agnostic literally means "I don't know".

Their opinion is flawed. It exemplified the double standard so pervasive today among those who think the biblical god is evil for doing exactly what a mother does when they murder their own offspring.

No one else put that child into her womb, yet even though she intentionally puts that child there through her own efforts, he blesses her decision to murder it anyways.

Ultimately, I think it boils down to when one makes the decision, not if they make a decision. A woman needs to make the decision not to put a baby into her womb in the first place. A woman can have her tubes tied if she's serious about not wanting to pay the bills for an unwanted squatter in her belly.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Do you know what you're talking about? No.
I'm not saying that as an insult, but as a logical deduction from your responses. It seems you are secular, you believe you could be wrong about everything you claim to know, which means you don't know anything*... including what you're talking about.
I've been down this road too many times.

*An agnostic could be wrong about a given topic. Agnostic literally means "I don't know".

Why you introduce knowledge into a conversation about my opinions on abortion, I have no idea.

(And attacking the very concept of knowledge is an insipid, Sye Ten-esque presup parlour trick.)

 

[radvermin]

Why you introduce knowledge into a conversation about my opinions on abortion, I have no idea.

(And attacking the very concept of knowledge is an insipid, Sye Ten-esque presup parlour trick.)

Thanks for your opinion.

 

[Electric Skeptic]

Quite false. Your current error is based on several preceding false assumptions.

Nevertheless, all your false assumptions are based on one underlying false assumption: people own themselves.

You assume the man’s body, which made the woman’s body pregnant, belongs to the man and you falsely assume the woman’s body belongs to her.

Even worse, you falsely assume the baby’s body belongs to the woman just because the baby happens to be in the woman.

You assume so much and all your assumptions are false.

Human beings actually belong to the only God who made them and who controls their destiny and who will eventually call them to account for what they did with his property.

Any person, who lays claim to property belonging to God (the owner and maker of everything) and precedes to go forth doing whatsoever he wishes with it, is nothing less than a thief who steals and killer who kills

You have not demonstrated and cannot demonstrate that any god exists, much less that that god 'owns' our bodies.

To this date you have yet to prove that you own your body.

The onus is on you to prove that your god exists and that he owns our bodies.

Instead, all you’ve done is to post more failed attempts at wishing away realities that you fear and want to ignore

That's just nonsensical cheer-leading.

 

[Electric Skeptic]

Do you know what you're talking about? No.
I'm not saying that as an insult, but as a logical deduction from your responses. It seems you are secular, you believe you could be wrong about everything you claim to know, which means you don't know anything*... including what you're talking about.
I've been down this road too many times.

*An agnostic could be wrong about a given topic. Agnostic literally means "I don't know".

Anybody could be wrong about everything they claim to know. That is not a justification for ignoring or disregarding what they think, say or argue.

 

[DaGeo]

"The arguments surrounding pro-choice are the same as arguing that it's okay to kill a person because that person doesn't exist."
Take for example "my body my choice". As I've learned from people here, this is referring only to the "mother". No mention of the baby inside.
All forms of pro-choice arguments essentially ignore the human being growing in the womb, ie treating that human as though they don't exist.


*Chew Toy Apologetics is my idea for inviting individuals to tear my thoughts apart. Have fun, but be thoughtful.

Those defending child murder are keen at making arguments against the existence of things they fear.

For example, because they fear standing before God and giving account to him, they resort to psychological denial.

In other words, they actively work hard to suppress (deny) belief about the God they know is real.

They search out false teachers, who also fear God and suppress knowledge about God and being accountable to him.

Because it’s so hard to resist knowledge about God’s existence, false teachers make up false stories like the myth of evolution.

They repeat this myth as often as possible and even cloak the lie in scientific jargon because they know that certain people are generally shallow and are eager to believe even a lie especially if it helps suppress knowledge about a God they fear and dread.

If a lie is repeated often enough, it becomes believable.
If you doubt me, look at how many people have gullibly forced themselves to believe the lie of evolution

 

[DaGeo]

You have not demonstrated and cannot demonstrate that any god exists, much less that that god 'owns' our bodies.

I don’t need to demonstrate that God exists to you because you know he exists and God has made his existence known to you

That’s why you work so hard at suppressing (denying) the existence of God because you fear having to give account to him for how you’ve wasted his resources

The onus is on you to prove that your god exists and that he owns our bodies.

No, the onus is on you to stop hiding from the God you know is real

That's just nonsensical cheer-leading.

Your statements are predictable.
In fact, you ought to check out clinical statements of psychological denial and see how your responses line up

 

[Electric Skeptic]

I don’t need to demonstrate that God exists to you because you know he exists and God has made his existence known to you

Yes, you do. You can't, so you throw out the nonsense that everybody knows he exists but just denies it.

That’s why you work so hard at suppressing (denying) the existence of God because you fear having to give account to him for how you’ve wasted his resources

I don't work at that at all, much less "so hard".

No, the onus is on you to stop hiding from the God you know is real

There is no god I know is real.

Your statements are predictable.

As are yours.

In fact, you ought to check out clinical statements of psychological denial and see how your responses line up

They don't. Next?

 

[DaGeo]

Yes, you do. You can't, so you throw out the nonsense that everybody knows he exists but just denies it.

After I do that will ask me to prove other realities like gravity also⁉️

I don't work at that at all, much less "so hard".

You’re doing it now

There is no god I know is real.

If you keep telling yourself that, maybe one day you’ll believe it.
In the meantime, keep working hard to block out those realities you find so uncomfortable

 

[radvermin]

Anybody could be wrong about everything they claim to know. That is not a justification for ignoring or disregarding what they think, say or argue.

True. More needs to be going on.

 

[Electric Skeptic]

After I do that will ask me to prove other realities like gravity also⁉️

'After'? You can't do that and we both know it.

You’re doing it now

No, I'm not. I've no need to.

If you keep telling yourself that, maybe one day you’ll believe it.

I don't have to tell myself that; it's a fact.

In the meantime, keep working hard to block out those realities you find so uncomfortable

There are no such realities and your bluster is a poor attempt to hide the fact that you cannot demonstrate the existence of this god.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Thanks for your opinion.

No sweat.

As soon as somebody puts abortion beyond opinion, I'm all ears.

 

[BMS]

The decision falls to the person inside whom the other human is living.
And only that person.

Not only do I not have an opinion, I don't see myself as having the right to one.
Do I think that abortion is bad? No.
Do I think it's good? No.

so as was pointed out to you its a decision of one human being over the life of another human being whom you dehumanise by not recognising them as a person. In the next instance you dont recognize the biological sex of people. Your ideology is mentally retarded.

 

[BMS]

No sweat.

As soon as somebody puts abortion beyond opinion, I'm all ears.

Not acceptable. Gender ideology is a lie yet you defend that. Aa soon as you disagree with someone you cease dialogue. So..
As soon as you start debating we can have a debate 😀😉

 

[BMS]

You have not demonstrated and cannot demonstrate that any god exists, much less that that god 'owns' our bodies.


The onus is on you to prove that your god exists and that he owns our bodies.

That's just nonsensical cheer-leading.

You have not demonstrated anything. The onus is in you to do so. Please do so.😀😉

 

[Eightcrackers]

Anybody could be wrong about everything they claim to know. That is not a justification for ignoring or disregarding what they think, say or argue.

"I can see and hear a car coming, so I shouldn't cross the road... but I could be wrong, so, what the hell..."

Nobody thinks like this.

(Well, not for long, anyway.)

 

[DaGeo]

'After'? You can't do that and we both know it.

Only you think it

No, I'm not. I've no need to.


I don't have to tell myself that; it's a fact.

There you go again, trying to convince yourself.

There are no such realities and your bluster is a poor attempt to hide the fact that you cannot demonstrate the existence of this god.

Why should I explain to you the evidences of God. You already believe in them even though you keep trying to not believe them

 

[radvermin]

No sweat.

As soon as somebody puts abortion beyond opinion, I'm all ears.

Yeah, I have a different one in mind that I think I'll post in a different thread that was inspired by our conversation.
Stay tuned

 

[Eightcrackers]

Yeah, I have a different one in mind that I think I'll post in a different thread that was inspired by our conversation.
Stay tuned

Feel free to link me.