Chew Toy Apologetic*

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Only you think it
We both know it. This entire line of 'argument' of yours is an attempt to divert attention from it.

There you go again, trying to convince yourself.
Nope.

Why should I explain to you the evidences of God. You already believe in them even though you keep trying to not believe them
Why "should" you? If you could, of course, you wouldn't as that. You'd just explain them. The fact that you are doing all this dancing around the issue and making false claims about what I believe demonstrates that you cannot prove it.
 

mikeT

Well-known member
"The arguments surrounding pro-choice are the same as arguing that it's okay to kill a person because that person doesn't exist."
That's a pretty silly argument; it seem to be pretty nonsensical.

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.
This is what is known as a straw man. There are many pro-choice arguments which say that, no matter what's growing inside the mother. she has the right to decide whether it lives or dies.

*Chew Toy Apologetics is my idea for inviting individuals to tear my thoughts apart. Have fun, but be thoughtful.
This is not fun. At all. I know you as a generally thoughtful Christian who questions atheist ideas but strives to portray those ideas accurately; your "chew toy apologetics" concept is a step backwards, in every sense of the word. You threw out mischaracterizations of the pro-choice platform, and then asked your readers to argue against those mischaracterizations.

Not good.
 

radvermin

Active member
That's a pretty silly argument; it seem to be pretty nonsensical.
Intentionally so.
This is what is known as a straw man. There are many pro-choice arguments which say that, no matter what's growing inside the mother. she has the right to decide whether it lives or dies.
Why did you use the word "it" as opposed to "he/she"? I would argue that you did so because it does matter what's growing inside the mother.

If you don't like this one, that's fine. I put up another thread that you may consider at least less of a step backwards.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Why did you use the word "it" as opposed to "he/she"? I would argue that you did so because it does matter what's growing inside the mother.
Why do you use the word "baby" as opposed to "foetus/embryo"? I would argue that you do so because it attempts to foster an emotional attachment in lieu of a rational intellectual argument. If your argument is based solely on emotion, that's fine. Just don't try to sneak it in through false terminology.
 

mikeT

Well-known member
Why did you use the word "it" as opposed to "he/she"? I would argue that you did so because it does matter what's growing inside the mother.
Of course it matters. Has anyone - on either side of the debate - ever suggested otherwise? I'm guessing "no", so your point is more of a red herring, or perhaps a distraction.

I said "it" because at some point during gestation, the mother carries a ball of cells, without gender attributes or conscience or heart; at some other point, those traits have developed. "It" is the appropriate pronoun for something that is barely defined (let alone sentient).

If you don't like this one, that's fine. I put up another thread that you may consider at least less of a step backwards.
Of course, you're free to post what and how you want, sans approval from me or anyone else here (but within the boundaries of the rules). I just saw this thread as disappointing. There are more effective ways to be aggressive about what you think or feel or want to discuss.
 

radvermin

Active member
Of course it matters. Has anyone - on either side of the debate - ever suggested otherwise? I'm guessing "no", so your point is more of a red herring, or perhaps a distraction.

I said "it" because at some point during gestation, the mother carries a ball of cells, without gender attributes or conscience or heart; at some other point, those traits have developed. "It" is the appropriate pronoun for something that is barely defined (let alone sentient).
Okay. I was think you had a different reason, so I admit that I misjudged what you wrote.

I think my comment still stands even if it doesn't apply to what you wrote, though.
When people want to distance themselves from moral treatment of others they tend to avoid proper pronouns and go to "it", "thing" etc.
In other words, based on the language people use in this debate, I would disagree with your statement "There are many pro-choice arguments which say that, no matter what's growing inside the mother. she has the right to decide whether it lives or dies." And I would add that people may have arguments for a why a mom should abort her fully healthy 12 week baby, but either they're not good ones or the mother will still not want to refer to the child as their baby.

Of course, you're free to post what and how you want, sans approval from me or anyone else here (but within the boundaries of the rules). I just saw this thread as disappointing. There are more effective ways to be aggressive about what you think or feel or want to discuss.
Wasn't trying to be aggressive. Not even of the passive persuasion. :D
I don't want to angry. I tend to be stupid when I'm angry and have to apologize.
And it is sooo so easy to get angry with this topic as I've already discovered.
 

DaGeo

Active member
We both know it. This entire line of 'argument' of yours is an attempt to divert attention from it.
Thanks for another of your unfounded opinions. You’re welcome to post them
Another denial, but that’s ok. You’re not obligated in any way to me.
So go forth and deny, to your hearts desire, any idea you find uncomfortable
Why "should" you? If you could, of course, you wouldn't as that. You'd just explain them. The fact that you are doing all this dancing around the issue and making false claims about what I believe demonstrates that you cannot prove it.
Your posts clearly demonstrate an obsession with and an inner need to disprove God.

Furthermore, your arguments appear to be motivated by a personal drive to deny the existence of God.

Don’t attack me just because I keep calling you out
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Thanks for another of your unfounded opinions. You’re welcome to post them
As are you.

Another denial, but that’s ok. You’re not obligated in any way to me.
So go forth and deny, to your hearts desire, any idea you find uncomfortable
No thanks. I deny ideas that are unsupported - like yours.

Your posts clearly demonstrate an obsession with and an inner need to disprove God.
Your posts clearly demonstrate that you imagine others have an obsession with and an inner need to disprove God.

Furthermore, your arguments appear to be motivated by a personal drive to deny the existence of God.
Furthermore, your arguments appear to be motivated by a personal drive to deny the existence of atheists.

Don’t attack me just because I keep calling you out
The only one attacking is you, as usual. You don't "call [me] out"; you repeatedly state falsehoods about me.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Why do you use the word "baby" as opposed to "foetus/embryo"? I would argue that you do so because it attempts to foster an emotional attachment in lieu of a rational intellectual argument. If your argument is based solely on emotion, that's fine. Just don't try to sneak it in through false terminology.
Why do you use the word 'transwonan' instead or woman? The idea that foetus is an emotional deception has been put to you many times yet you seem oblivioud. Whilst the medical profession often call the human being in the womb a baby the name for the stage of development of the person is embryo and foetal. Sadly for you since you dont recognise the person, what you want to call them is irrelevant.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Why do you use the word 'transwonan' instead or woman? The idea that foetus is an emotional deception has been put to you many times yet you seem oblivioud. Whilst the medical profession often call the human being in the womb a baby the name for the stage of development of the person is embryo and foetal. Sadly for you since you dont recognise the person, what you want to call them is irrelevant.
Once again your obsession with transgender people is noted. Are you capable, I wonder, of writing a post without reference to it? Is your spoken dialogue also littered with irrelevant bursts of transmania? Could you buy a bus ticket or order a meal without mentioning transgender?
 

DaGeo

Active member
It is in her body, so she should have the choice as to whether or not it remains there.
Quite false.

The only way a human can enter life is through male and female sexual intimacy

Since it’s common knowledge that sexual intimacy results in the conception of a real person entering into life, then no legal or moral ground should exist for a parent to kill a child who was obviously invited to live in its mother’s body

Note: Lots of murders kill people for the sake of convenience. For example, a robber becomes a murderer in order to make it easier to seize another’s property.

Likewise, some parents, for the sake of illegitimate convenience, choose rather to kill their kids than take responsibility for them
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Quite false.

The only way a human can enter life is through male and female sexual intimacy

Since it’s common knowledge that sexual intimacy results in the conception of a real person entering into life, then no legal or moral ground should exist for a parent to kill a child who was obviously invited to live in its mother’s body
Consenting to sex is not "inviting" a fetus; conception is something that happens a very small percentage of the time. Driving results in crashes a very small percentage of the time, too - that does not mean that driving is 'inviting' a crash.
Note: Lots of murders kill people for the sake of convenience. For example, a robber becomes a murderer in order to make it easier to seize another’s property.
Which is irrelevant.
Likewise, some parents, for the sake of illegitimate convenience, choose rather to kill their kids than take responsibility for them
Fortunately, such parents tend to be arrested and convicted, because killing children is illegal just about everywhere.
 

mikeT

Well-known member
I think my comment still stands even if it doesn't apply to what you wrote, though.
When people want to distance themselves from moral treatment of others they tend to avoid proper pronouns and go to "it", "thing" etc.
In other words, based on the language people use in this debate, I would disagree with your statement "There are many pro-choice arguments which say that, no matter what's growing inside the mother. she has the right to decide whether it lives or dies." And I would add that people may have arguments for a why a mom should abort her fully healthy 12 week baby, but either they're not good ones or the mother will still not want to refer to the child as their baby.
Sure. With no equivocation from me, the sanitization of language does happen in the abortion debate. It's justified to the extent that the language is medically-correct, but it's easy to dehumanize the fetus, too.

The only thing I will say is that the reverse also happens in this debate. People call a 1 day old fetus a baby or a child, to over-humanize a stage of development in which fully 25% of fetuses never survive to grow a heart or a brain, or eyes or limbs. Both sides use language strategically.

Wasn't trying to be aggressive. Not even of the passive persuasion. :D
I don't want to angry. I tend to be stupid when I'm angry and have to apologize.
And it is sooo so easy to get angry with this topic as I've already discovered.
As I've said, I value your input here in the forums because it's almost always thoughtful. This thread just seemed atypical - but I wont belabor the point; its water under the bridge. I hope I answered your OP productively. Let me know if you think there still is something that wasn't addressed.
 

Eightcrackers

Well-known member
Once again your obsession with transgender people is noted. Are you capable, I wonder, of writing a post without reference to it? Is your spoken dialogue also littered with irrelevant bursts of transmania? Could you buy a bus ticket or order a meal without mentioning transgender?
"One ticket to South End, please."
"One pound twenty."
"What do you mean by "woman"?!"
 

DaGeo

Active member
Consenting to sex is not "inviting" a fetus; conception is something that happens a very small percentage of the time. Driving results in crashes a very small percentage of the time, too - that does not mean that driving is 'inviting' a crash.
Quite false but at least your false logic is consistent. Now your comparing sex to car crashes‼️‼️‼️‼️😂😂🤣🤣🤣

YOU CANT MAKE THIS STUFF UP‼️‼️‼️
Which is irrelevant.
Well, yes, of course it is to someone steeped in ignorance
Fortunately, such parents tend to be arrested and convicted, because killing children is illegal just about everywhere.
Quite false. Parents who kill just vote for policies and politicians who allow them to keep killing
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Quite false but at least your false logic is consistent.
Yet you cannot show any falsehood.
Now your comparing sex to car crashes‼️‼️‼️‼️😂😂🤣🤣🤣
Do you not know what the word 'compare means'?
Well, yes, of course it is to someone steeped in ignorance
Like you?
Quite false. Parents who kill just vote for policies and politicians who allow them to keep killing
Unsupported. No politicians allow parents to kill their kids.
 

DaGeo

Active member
Yet you cannot show any falsehood.
“You can’t handle the truth”, ever heard that one⁉️ You probably hear it a lot 😂🤣
Do you not know what the word 'compare means'?
Yes. But have you heard of comparing apples and oranges⁉️⁉️🤣🤣😂😂
Like you?
I knew you would misunderstand but I’m not surprised
Unsupported. No politicians allow parents to kill their kids.
May I introduce you to Governor Ralph Notham⁉️ He’s just like you in so many ways. I assume you love your own kind. Yes, and he wants to kill people after they are born.

You really need to stop hating the God who made you and start educating yourself. And just remember, you’re not God

So sorry you’re so ignorant about your own beliefs and ignorant about those who have invented those beliefs for you
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
“You can’t handle the truth”, ever heard that one⁉️ You probably hear it a lot 😂🤣
Wrong yet again.
Yes. But have you heard of comparing apples and oranges⁉️⁉️🤣🤣😂😂
Great. You've heard of it. Now go learn what it means.
I knew you would misunderstand but I’m not surprised
...except that I didn't understand.
May I introduce you to Governor Ralph Notham⁉️ He’s just like you in so many ways. I assume you love your own kind. Yes, and he wants to kill people after they are born.
Except that no, he doesn't want to kill people.

And no, I love the people I know and love. Unlike Christians, I don't make my love meaningless by claiming to love people I don't even know.
You really need to stop hating the God who made you and start educating yourself. And just remember, you’re not God
I hate God no more than I hate Voldemort or Sauron, nor do I think I'm God.
So sorry you’re so ignorant about your own beliefs and ignorant about those who have invented those beliefs for you
I'm not the one who's showing their ignorance.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Of course it matters. Has anyone - on either side of the debate - ever suggested otherwise? I'm guessing "no", so your point is more of a red herring, or perhaps a distraction.

I said "it" because at some point during gestation, the mother carries a ball of cells, without gender attributes or conscience or heart; at some other point, those traits have developed. "It" is the appropriate pronoun for something that is barely defined (let alone sentient).


Of course, you're free to post what and how you want, sans approval from me or anyone else here (but within the boundaries of the rules). I just saw this thread as disappointing. There are more effective ways to be aggressive about what you think or feel or want to discuss.
The biological sex doesnt start developing until about 6-8 weeks. No such thing as gender with the offspring in the womb
 
Top