Go, girl... student changes speech

Iconoclast

Well-known member
According to his self-appointed human spokesmen...

Again: if your god wants something from me, he can tell me himself. I ignore self-appointed spokesmen.
The bible describes those who ignore God;

Psalm 14

King James Version

14 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
2 The Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.
3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
God is only Just.
Agreed. Paul points this out in Romans 9:14 " What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid." it's a Given with Paul.
That He has mercy on anyone is great mercy.
Sure, but that's beside the point. The point is that he has mercy on some while serving up wrath for others.

"15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth."
I do not deal with hypothetical.
Then you ignore Paul's hypothetical question as well, i.e.

"19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,"
I deal with the word of God revealed.
If you're claiming that Paul is not the word of God, then I can accept that. If you believe that Paul's letters are the inspired word of God, then you most certainly have decided to ignore God's word as well as the exact same hypothetical question Paul poses in Romans 9. Don't feel bad though. Very few professing Christians have ever been prepared to defend their faith when it comes to this question.
 

Iconoclast

Well-known member
Agreed. Paul points this out in Romans 9:14 " What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid." it's a Given with Paul.

Sure, but that's beside the point. The point is that he has mercy on some while serving up wrath for others.

"15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth."

Then you ignore Paul's hypothetical question as well, i.e.

"19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,"

If you're claiming that Paul is not the word of God, then I can accept that. If you believe that Paul's letters are the inspired word of God, then you most certainly have decided to ignore God's word as well as the exact same hypothetical question Paul poses in Romans 9. Don't feel bad though. Very few professing Christians have ever been prepared to defend their faith when it comes to this question.
Paul is answering an imaginary objector, not doing idle speculation or 0ffering hypothetical ideas.
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
Paul is answering an imaginary objector,
Yes, he's addressing an objection. He addresses and then uses it to drive home his argument. It's brilliant.
not doing idle speculation or 0ffering hypothetical ideas.
I never said it was idle speculation, but it is most definitely a hypothetical situation, and one which most definitely proves his point. He presents an air tight, and irrefutable argument.
 

Yakuda

Well-known member

The speech that high school valedictorian Paxton Smith pulled from inside her graduation gown was not the one she had shown the school. So she took a deep breath before launching into it, wondering whether she would be allowed to share her thoughts about Texas' new restrictive abortion law.


"I cannot give up this platform to promote complacency and peace, when there is a war on my body and a war on my rights," Smith said in her speech at the graduation ceremony for Lake Highlands High School in Dallas.


Despite swapping her text, Smith finished her speech and got a rousing cheer from her classmates and staff. In the days since her address on Sunday, video of the event has gone viral, and Smith has been praised for speaking her mind. (You can read a full transcript of her speech below.)


"I have dreams, and hopes and ambitions. Every girl graduating today does," Smith said. She later added, "And without our input and without our consent, our control over that future has been stripped away from us."




Smith concluded her speech by stating, "We cannot stay silent."


Her remarks came less than two weeks after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed new restrictions into law that ban abortion as soon as a fetal heartbeat can be detected — as early as six weeks.


The Governor Of Texas Has Signed A Law That Bans Abortion As Early As 6 Weeks

National


The Governor Of Texas Has Signed A Law That Bans Abortion As Early As 6 Weeks


As Smith noted, many women do not realize they're pregnant at six weeks. The law does not allow exceptions for cases of rape or incest.


The senior had intended to use her speech to talk about TV and the media, but, she said, "it feels wrong to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in the state."


Smith says she has received hundreds of messages of support, as videos of her graduation speech were widely shared across social media. In many ways, the speech went better than she anticipated, especially since the school had raised the possibility of remarks being cut short if they diverged from the approved script.


"I thought that the microphone was going to get cut off a couple minutes in, but it didn't," Smith told local TV station WFAA in Dallas.


In a statement released to local media, the Richardson Independent School District, which includes Lake Highlands, says that students choose their own messages to share at graduation. But noting that Smith's speech was not approved and "not in the podium book" of remarks for the event, the district says it will look at ways to prevent similar switches from taking place in the future.


Smith's father, Russell Smith, tells the Lake Highlands Advocate that he's proud of his daughter.


"It was something that she felt was important, and she had the nerve, determination and boldness to put herself out there and say her piece," he said. "So few people demonstrate this level of maturity and poise, regardless of age."




The text of Smith's speech, as transcribed by NPR:


I'm not usually very good at expressing my gratitude for the people that I care about. But I would like to say "thank you" to Coach. I think he's had a bigger role in my life than he realizes. [deep breath]


OK.


As we leave high school, we need to make our voices heard. Today, I was going to talk about TV and media and content, because it's something that's very important to me. However, under light of recent events, it feels wrong to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in the state.


Recently, the Heartbeat Bill was passed in Texas. Starting in September, there will be a ban on abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, regardless of whether the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest.


Six weeks. That's all women get. And so before they realize — most of them don't realize that they're pregnant by six weeks — so before they have a chance to decide if they are emotionally, physically and financially stable enough to carry out a full-term pregnancy, before they have the chance to decide if they can take on the responsibility of bringing another human being into the world, that decision is made for them by a stranger.


A decision that will affect the rest of their lives is made by a stranger.


I have dreams and hopes and ambitions. Every girl graduating today does. And we have spent our entire lives working towards our future. And without our input and without our consent, our control over that future has been stripped away from us. [applause]


I am terrified that if my contraceptives fail, I am terrified that if I am raped, then my hopes and aspirations and dreams and efforts for my future will no longer matter. I hope that you can feel how gut-wrenching that is. I hope you can feel how dehumanizing it is, to have the autonomy over your own body taken away from you.


And I'm talking about this today — on a day as important as this, on a day honoring 12 years of hard academic work, on a day where we are all gathered together, on a day where you are most inclined to listen to a voice like mine, a woman's voice — to tell you that this is a problem, and it's a problem that cannot wait.


And I cannot give up this platform to promote complacency and peace, when there is a war on my body and a war on my rights. A war on the rights of your mothers [cheers], a war on the rights of your sisters, a war on the rights of your daughters.


We cannot stay silent. Thank you.


[cheers, applause]

Good for her! Standing up to stupidity.
Leftist coward. Sorry for the redundancy
 

Yakuda

Well-known member

The speech that high school valedictorian Paxton Smith pulled from inside her graduation gown was not the one she had shown the school. So she took a deep breath before launching into it, wondering whether she would be allowed to share her thoughts about Texas' new restrictive abortion law.


"I cannot give up this platform to promote complacency and peace, when there is a war on my body and a war on my rights," Smith said in her speech at the graduation ceremony for Lake Highlands High School in Dallas.


Despite swapping her text, Smith finished her speech and got a rousing cheer from her classmates and staff. In the days since her address on Sunday, video of the event has gone viral, and Smith has been praised for speaking her mind. (You can read a full transcript of her speech below.)


"I have dreams, and hopes and ambitions. Every girl graduating today does," Smith said. She later added, "And without our input and without our consent, our control over that future has been stripped away from us."




Smith concluded her speech by stating, "We cannot stay silent."


Her remarks came less than two weeks after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed new restrictions into law that ban abortion as soon as a fetal heartbeat can be detected — as early as six weeks.


The Governor Of Texas Has Signed A Law That Bans Abortion As Early As 6 Weeks

National


The Governor Of Texas Has Signed A Law That Bans Abortion As Early As 6 Weeks


As Smith noted, many women do not realize they're pregnant at six weeks. The law does not allow exceptions for cases of rape or incest.


The senior had intended to use her speech to talk about TV and the media, but, she said, "it feels wrong to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in the state."


Smith says she has received hundreds of messages of support, as videos of her graduation speech were widely shared across social media. In many ways, the speech went better than she anticipated, especially since the school had raised the possibility of remarks being cut short if they diverged from the approved script.


"I thought that the microphone was going to get cut off a couple minutes in, but it didn't," Smith told local TV station WFAA in Dallas.


In a statement released to local media, the Richardson Independent School District, which includes Lake Highlands, says that students choose their own messages to share at graduation. But noting that Smith's speech was not approved and "not in the podium book" of remarks for the event, the district says it will look at ways to prevent similar switches from taking place in the future.


Smith's father, Russell Smith, tells the Lake Highlands Advocate that he's proud of his daughter.


"It was something that she felt was important, and she had the nerve, determination and boldness to put herself out there and say her piece," he said. "So few people demonstrate this level of maturity and poise, regardless of age."




The text of Smith's speech, as transcribed by NPR:


I'm not usually very good at expressing my gratitude for the people that I care about. But I would like to say "thank you" to Coach. I think he's had a bigger role in my life than he realizes. [deep breath]


OK.


As we leave high school, we need to make our voices heard. Today, I was going to talk about TV and media and content, because it's something that's very important to me. However, under light of recent events, it feels wrong to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in the state.


Recently, the Heartbeat Bill was passed in Texas. Starting in September, there will be a ban on abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, regardless of whether the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest.


Six weeks. That's all women get. And so before they realize — most of them don't realize that they're pregnant by six weeks — so before they have a chance to decide if they are emotionally, physically and financially stable enough to carry out a full-term pregnancy, before they have the chance to decide if they can take on the responsibility of bringing another human being into the world, that decision is made for them by a stranger.


A decision that will affect the rest of their lives is made by a stranger.


I have dreams and hopes and ambitions. Every girl graduating today does. And we have spent our entire lives working towards our future. And without our input and without our consent, our control over that future has been stripped away from us. [applause]


I am terrified that if my contraceptives fail, I am terrified that if I am raped, then my hopes and aspirations and dreams and efforts for my future will no longer matter. I hope that you can feel how gut-wrenching that is. I hope you can feel how dehumanizing it is, to have the autonomy over your own body taken away from you.


And I'm talking about this today — on a day as important as this, on a day honoring 12 years of hard academic work, on a day where we are all gathered together, on a day where you are most inclined to listen to a voice like mine, a woman's voice — to tell you that this is a problem, and it's a problem that cannot wait.


And I cannot give up this platform to promote complacency and peace, when there is a war on my body and a war on my rights. A war on the rights of your mothers [cheers], a war on the rights of your sisters, a war on the rights of your daughters.


We cannot stay silent. Thank you.


[cheers, applause]

Good for her! Standing up to stupidity.
A cowardly piece of garbage
 

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
Good for her. There is hope in the young. That school has done a good job in teaching her both to think for herself and to express her thoughts with confidence.
Yet another reason to flee public schools. Imagine murder is now acceptable.

I don't know the future, but I see a day coming when abortion/murder will no longer be legally acceptable. What will she do now? Run to Canada, Mexico, Europe? Good luck with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMS

Temujin

Well-known member
Yet another reason to flee public schools. Imagine murder is now acceptable.

I don't know the future, but I see a day coming when abortion/murder will no longer be legally acceptable. What will she do now? Run to Canada, Mexico, Europe? Good luck with that.
I have more hope for the future. There may be temporary backward steps here and there, but I see no reason to think that legal abortion, properly regulated, will ever be removed as a choice for women. The Ireland experience shows that even deeply conservative religious societies can adopt sensible abortion procedures. It took the well-publicised death of a young woman refused the abortion that would save her life, but it has come. The "abortion is murder" trope till has a few hold-outs amongst the wilfully ignorant and poorly educated in less developed societies, but it will whither and die out as the benefits of well-regulated social policy on abortion become apparent.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Yet another reason to flee public schools. Imagine murder is now acceptable.

I don't know the future, but I see a day coming when abortion/murder will no longer be legally acceptable. What will she do now? Run to Canada, Mexico, Europe? Good luck with that.
Absolutely. In the UK protesters have been blocking roads and motorways because the Police standby for ages reasoning with them. Not only is it illegal to block roads I have just listened to several left wing politicians insist peaceful protest such as this must be allowed, the same ones who insist peaceful protest that isnt illegal be shut down when it was against the illegal lgbt teaching in a Birmingham school or the peaceful protest outside abortion clinics.
Then the left wonder why the Capitol Hill riots.

As we see the woke left have no idea what they are doing.
 

BMS

Well-known member
I have more hope for the future. There may be temporary backward steps here and there, but I see no reason to think that legal abortion, properly regulated, will ever be removed as a choice for women. The Ireland experience shows that even deeply conservative religious societies can adopt sensible abortion procedures. It took the well-publicised death of a young woman refused the abortion that would save her life, but it has come. The "abortion is murder" trope till has a few hold-outs amongst the wilfully ignorant and poorly educated in less developed societies, but it will whither and die out as the benefits of well-regulated social policy on abortion become apparent.
You didnt mention the baby, the unborn offspring in your mentally deranged diatribe of your mentally deranged 'well regulated social policy' and if you cant address the plight of the unborn then you dont actually know what abortion is.
Futhermore what woman? You dont know what a woman is. You dont even know whether your imaginary 'transwoman' is a man or a woman.

What you see as 'well regulated social policy' is bluster and fluffery.
 

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
I have more hope for the future. There may be temporary backward steps here and there, but I see no reason to think that legal abortion, properly regulated, will ever be removed as a choice for women. The Ireland experience shows that even deeply conservative religious societies can adopt sensible abortion procedures. It took the well-publicised death of a young woman refused the abortion that would save her life, but it has come. The "abortion is murder" trope till has a few hold-outs amongst the wilfully ignorant and poorly educated in less developed societies, but it will whither and die out as the benefits of well-regulated social policy on abortion become apparent.
I have an undergraduate degree as well as a graduate degree M.Ed. I am currently working on my Ph.d. Abortion is murder.

Read these objections:

The SLED Model

To further show that the unborn fetus is a human being, let’s introduce the SLED model, an acronym that stands for:

S – Size. The unborn fetus is smaller than an infant and most people are shorter than 7-foot basketball star Rudy Gobert. However, rational people would not claim that the infant is more valuable than the fetus nor is Rudy worth more than a teenage girl. In addition, a sumo wrestler does not have more value than a trapeze artist. Therefore, size does not indicate one’s worth.

L – Level of Development. The unborn fetus is at an earlier stage of his or her development than a newborn baby, but an eight-year-old child is less developed (both physically and mentally) than an adolescent. Older, stronger, more intelligent humans do not have more dignity and fundamental rights than those who are younger, weaker, less intelligent, and more vulnerable. To use the acorn analogy, an acorn is not a “potential” oak tree but rather a tiny living oak tree inside a shell. It is at the same level of development that every oak tree once existed during that particular stage of life.

E – Environment. A journey through a birth canal cannot account for a change in a child’s rights. Location does not affect personhood. A child in the womb or outside the womb is still a human being.

D – Degree of Dependency. The unborn fetus is totally dependent on the mother for life through the umbilical cord, but newborn babies are also fully dependent. A baby left to herself will die within hours unless she is attended to and her needs met. In fact, everyone relies on other people and things to some degree. We don’t question the personhood of those who are dependent on kidney machines, insulin, or pacemakers. Elderly people in a nursing home who have to be fed are no less valuable than the person who is feeding them.[4]

The syllogism

Let’s return to the syllogism given above:

Premise 1: It is wrong to intentionally kill innocent human beings.

Premise 2: Abortion intentionally kills innocent human beings.

Therefore, Abortion is morally wrong.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
You didnt mention the baby, the unborn offspring in your mentally deranged diatribe of your mentally deranged 'well regulated social policy' and if you cant address the plight of the unborn then you dont actually know what abortion is.
Futhermore what woman? You dont know what a woman is. You dont even know whether your imaginary 'transwoman' is a man or a woman.

What you see as 'well regulated social policy' is bluster and fluffery.
There is no such thing as "the plight of the unborn". The unborn have no rights, nor should they have. There is only one person to consider, and that is the mother. What happens with the unborn is her choice and decision. What I see as well-regulated social policy is what actually happens in the vast majority of developed nations, where abortion is not a controversial issue. If you want to call policy that works "bluster and fluffery", that's your privilege. It doesn't stop it working.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
I have an undergraduate degree as well as a graduate degree M.Ed. I am currently working on my Ph.d. Abortion is murder.

Read these objections:

The SLED Model

To further show that the unborn fetus is a human being, let’s introduce the SLED model, an acronym that stands for:

S – Size. The unborn fetus is smaller than an infant and most people are shorter than 7-foot basketball star Rudy Gobert. However, rational people would not claim that the infant is more valuable than the fetus nor is Rudy worth more than a teenage girl. In addition, a sumo wrestler does not have more value than a trapeze artist. Therefore, size does not indicate one’s worth.

L – Level of Development. The unborn fetus is at an earlier stage of his or her development than a newborn baby, but an eight-year-old child is less developed (both physically and mentally) than an adolescent. Older, stronger, more intelligent humans do not have more dignity and fundamental rights than those who are younger, weaker, less intelligent, and more vulnerable. To use the acorn analogy, an acorn is not a “potential” oak tree but rather a tiny living oak tree inside a shell. It is at the same level of development that every oak tree once existed during that particular stage of life.

E – Environment. A journey through a birth canal cannot account for a change in a child’s rights. Location does not affect personhood. A child in the womb or outside the womb is still a human being.

D – Degree of Dependency. The unborn fetus is totally dependent on the mother for life through the umbilical cord, but newborn babies are also fully dependent. A baby left to herself will die within hours unless she is attended to and her needs met. In fact, everyone relies on other people and things to some degree. We don’t question the personhood of those who are dependent on kidney machines, insulin, or pacemakers. Elderly people in a nursing home who have to be fed are no less valuable than the person who is feeding them.[4]

The syllogism

Let’s return to the syllogism given above:

Premise 1: It is wrong to intentionally kill innocent human beings.

Premise 2: Abortion intentionally kills innocent human beings.

Therefore, Abortion is morally wrong.
Once more you cut and paste the busted SLED model, which has been torn to shreds several times. Every time you post it in fact. If you are so well-educated, which I have no reason to doubt, you might spend a little time actually defending your model rather than posting it then running away. The main problems with the model are:

Both your premises are untrue, and the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises even if they were true.

Your argument does nothing to establish either premise. It spends time making points that are not disputed, ignoring the actual arguments made for abortion rights.

Nowhere do you mention the humanity, or the rights of the woman involved.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Once more you cut and paste the busted SLED model, which has been torn to shreds several times. Every time you post it in fact. If you are so well-educated, which I have no reason to doubt, you might spend a little time actually defending your model rather than posting it then running away. The main problems with the model are:

Both your premises are untrue, and the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises even if they were true.

Your argument does nothing to establish either premise. It spends time making points that are not disputed, ignoring the actual arguments made for abortion rights.

Nowhere do you mention the humanity, or the rights of the woman involved.
They have only been supposedly torn to shreds in the minds of people who can't articulate why they think they have been torn to shreds.
Much like you have done.
 

BMS

Well-known member
There is no such thing as "the plight of the unborn".
Of course there is. Everyone including you went through a stage in their mother's womb. The killing of that human at that stage is certainly in every respect a plight. Get real.
The unborn have no rights,
But you previously said they did. You told me all humans have rights from the fetus to the corpse.
You don't even know what you are saying. You arent debating you are blogging

nor should they have.
No that is trans ideology and gender ideology which should have no rights because it doesn't exist, the unborn human is the human offspring and does exist.

There is only one person to consider, and that is the mother.
What do you mean by the mother? A man who calls himself a transwoman who you call a woman can be a mother? yes or no? You have made your bed, now lie in it.

What happens with the unborn is her choice and decision.
You just said there is only one person to consider and now you are considering the unborn.
What I see as well-regulated social policy is what actually happens in the vast majority of developed nations, where abortion is not a controversial issue.
Oh abortion is a controversial issue in ALL nations. What you see is what you want to see, not what exists.

Your ideology has blinded you to reality.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Of course there is. Everyone including you went through a stage in their mother's womb. The killing of that human at that stage is certainly in every respect a plight. Get real.

But you previously said they did. You told me all humans have rights from the fetus to the corpse.
You don't even know what you are saying. You arent debating you are blogging


No that is trans ideology and gender ideology which should have no rights because it doesn't exist, the unborn human is the human offspring and does exist.


What do you mean by the mother? A man who calls himself a transwoman who you call a woman can be a mother? yes or no? You have made your bed, now lie in it.


You just said there is only one person to consider and now you are considering the unborn.

Oh abortion is a controversial issue in ALL nations. What you see is what you want to see, not what exists.

Your ideology has blinded you to reality.
Your obsession with sex and gender issues are moot. This is the abortion board and has nothing to do with either sex or gender.

If you think that abortion is a controversial issue in the UK, you are certifiable. Beaning is more controversial.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Your obsession with sex and gender issues are moot.
Says the poster who was asked to name someone decent who names the mayor of bangor and the lgbtqi+ confusion. I dont think so.

This is the abortion board and has nothing to do with either sex or gender.
It does in the respect of the mother being a female and a woman, something you deny with your transgender ideology.

If you think that abortion is a controversial issue in the UK, you are certifiable.
If you dont think its a controversial issue then you are certifiable. What about the proposed ammendment in parliament for abortion up to birth three months ago.
I think someone who says a 'transwoman' is a man but can be a woman is in the certifiable spectrum, and even more so someone who says all human life from fetus to corpse has rights except the fetus doesnt. I think contradictions like that indicate issues with understanding and reasoning.

Beaning is more controversial.
more controversial than what? And dont say abortion because you have just said that isnt controversial.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Says the poster who was asked to name someone decent who names the mayor of bangor and the lgbtqi+ confusion. I dont think so.
On the abortion board? I don't think so. Have you made a case? I don't think so?

It does in the respect of the mother being a female and a woman, something you deny with your transgender ideology.
More falsehoods. What you say is untrue, both regard g my position and the position of trans issues, which have nothing to do with abortion.

If you dont think its a controversial issue then you are certifiable. What about the proposed ammendment in parliament for abortion up to birth three months ago.
What about it? What happened to it? Where is it now? What reporting did it receive? Where are the public debates, the demonstrations, the online petitions, the parliamentary questions, the party manifesto statements, the statements from community leaders, the clamour for change? What evidence other than your own personal disquiet is there that abortion is controversial in this country?
I think someone who says a 'transwoman' is a man but can be a woman is in the certifiable spectrum, and even more so someone who says all human life from fetus to corpse has rights except the fetus doesnt. I think contradictions like that indicate issues with understanding and reasoning.

more controversial than what? And dont say abortion because you have just said that isnt controversial.
The concept of zero was invented 2000 years ago and is currently taught in primary school. The number two is greater than and different from zero.
If A has some rights and B has zero rights, then B has different rights from A. If a concept X is controversial and another concept Y is not controversial, then X is more controversial than Y.
 
Top