Pro-choice

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
So that is why I am doing the same with you, as you do to us. Having been shown what the Biblical texts say, you prefer to ignore the evidence and pretend to remain undecided.

We happen to note that certain transgender activists, as shown, dont believe in gender identity. When you have sorted out the differences then come back with arguments about it, but not until. Until then you cannot claim that gender identity exists, so stop doing it.
You continue to be wrong about this, despite having been repeatedly shown.

Definition of gender identity

a person's internal sense of being male, female, some combination of male and female, or neither male nor female

If you do not feel that you are male, that's your problem. The rest of the world has a gender identity.
 

BMS

Well-known member
You continue to be wrong about this, despite having been repeatedly shown.

Definition of gender identity

a person's internal sense of being male, female, some combination of male and female, or neither male nor female

If you do not feel that you are male, that's your problem. The rest of the world has a gender identity.
Yes this definition has appeared in recent years and is clearly nonsense and need to be ignored until its removed. There is also a definition of pixie, but a pixie doesnt exist either https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pixie
Someone's sense of who they think they are, that denies what they are, is a deception. If a 50 year old, has an internal sense of being 14, could they go back to school legally? If a 14 year old boy has a sense of being a 22 year old woman, can he experience menstruation. An inner sense is neither quantifiable nor measurable.

The definition is of a social construct that most people reject
 
Last edited:

BMS

Well-known member
No, as an atheist, having been shown a biblical text, I shrug and say " So what?" To my mind biblical texts say nothing of relevance to me at all. I think it fairly amusing when Christians flourish the bible as if it was a light sabre, particularly when Christians as a whole cannot agree what it says.

Trans gender issues have nothing to do with abortion. Neither is anyone saying, "look what these goatherds wrote 2000 years ago. If you pretend the words were 21st century English, then it proves I'm right.". There is controversy over abortion. Different sides do not agree. That controversy is not resolved by you waving a partisan biblical reading and claiming victory. The notion is ludicrous.
So not all atheists agree with you, that is the point. Same with transgender issues, not at transgender activists agree with you. Who agrees or disagrees with you or me doesn't say anything about who might be right or wrong. That is why the evidence needs to be examined rather than who believes this or that.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
So not all atheists agree with you, that is the point.
Of course not, and I have said as much. What I don't say is that atheists who don't agree with me are confused about atheism and not troo atheists because I hold the key to troo atheism. That is what you say about Christians who don't agree with you, and it is a ridiculous position to take.
Same with transgender issues, not at transgender activists agree with you. Who agrees or disagrees with you or me doesn't say anything about who might be right or wrong. That is why the evidence needs to be examined rather than who believes this or that.
Exactly. Unless of course we are talking about morality, when there is no such evidence and the only tool is persuasion. There is concrete evidence of reality of course, the reality where most countries permit abortion and where virtually all countries recognise gender identity as a concept separate from sex. The evidence of that reality you seem to reject.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Of course not, and I have said as much. What I don't say is that atheists who don't agree with me are confused about atheism and not troo atheists because I hold the key to troo atheism. That is what you say about Christians who don't agree with you, and it is a ridiculous position to take. Exactly.
So why mention you are atheist on the subject of pro-choice abortion when we see that your group identity politics doesn't work?
Look at the evidence not what different people say.

Unless of course we are talking about morality, when there is no such evidence and the only tool is persuasion.
Well if we talk about morality in the light of your comment you will just have to be left undecided.
There is concrete evidence of reality of course, the reality where most countries permit abortion
Most countries dont permit abortion up until 24 weeks. So There is concrete evidence the UK law that you support is wrong.

and where virtually all countries recognise gender identity as a concept separate from sex.
No, that is you and your woke activists fibbing again. Not even the UK legally recognises gender identity as you do. The only mention in UK law is 'gender identity disorder' in the 2004 Gender Recognition Act. Sex is a protected characteristic of the Equality Act 2010, and 'gender identity' isn't. Therefore where a person whose sex is male misrepresents himself as a woman without having a medical recognition of dysphoria, the law is being misrepresented. You continue to peddle this deception.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Absolute Nonsense. Women have all sorts of rights. They just don't have the right to murder their unborn baby.
Firstly, my wording was driven by the fact that my post is a mirror image of the OP. An attempt to show that the issue has sincere people on all sides and that it is rather more nuanced than it is usually portrayed.
Secondly, nongone has the right to murder anyone, since murder is by definition illegal. It is also by definition not abortion. The Supreme Court where I live has ruled that the unborn child cannot be a victim of any crime, since it is not a person. Similar laws apply elsewhere. You may call taxes, theft. You may call abortion, murder. Neither statement is true. Both taxes and abortion rights are an essential feature of a just and moral society, prepared to care for and support its members, which to avoid doubt, do not include the unborn.
 

Gondwanaland

Well-known member
Firstly, my wording was driven by the fact that my post is a mirror image of the OP. An attempt to show that the issue has sincere people on all sides and that it is rather more nuanced than it is usually portrayed.
Secondly, nongone has the right to murder anyone, since murder is by definition illegal. It is also by definition not abortion. The Supreme Court where I live has ruled that the unborn child cannot be a victim of any crime, since it is not a person. Similar laws apply elsewhere. You may call taxes, theft. You may call abortion, murder. Neither statement is true. Both taxes and abortion rights are an essential feature of a just and moral society, prepared to care for and support its members, which to avoid doubt, do not include the unborn.
Abortion is murder, whether you like it or not. Just because some court or law has decided that murder is legal does not make it not murder.

Just as China's murder of the Uyghurs is murder, even if they make it legal. Just as Hitler's murder of Jews, Romani, homosexuals, Jehova's Witnesses, blacks, Slavs, mentally disabled, etc., was murder even if he made it legal in his country.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Abortion is murder, whether you like it or not. Just because some court or law has decided that murder is legal does not make it not murder.

Just as China's murder of the Uyghurs is murder, even if they make it legal. Just as Hitler's murder of Jews, Romani, homosexuals, Jehova's Witnesses, blacks, Slavs, mentally disabled, etc., was murder even if he made it legal in his country.
Wrong. Murder is a legal term. Hitler never made murder legal, he just ignored the law. International law can and is used in cases of genocide. International law supports countries making their own decisions on abortion. Hence, in every country where abortion is legal, it is not murder. Neither is it murder in most countries where it is not legal or where it used to be not legal. Killing the unborn, whether legally or not, is and always has been, a completely different category from homicide.

When the only way to support an argument is to tell obvious lies about it, then the likelihood is that the argument itself is faulty.
 

Gondwanaland

Well-known member
Wrong. Murder is a legal term. Hitler never made murder legal, he just ignored the law. International law can and is used in cases of genocide. International law supports countries making their own decisions on abortion. Hence, in every country where abortion is legal, it is not murder. Neither is it murder in most countries where it is not legal or where it used to be not legal. Killing the unborn, whether legally or not, is and always has been, a completely different category from homicide.

When the only way to support an argument is to tell obvious lies about it, then the likelihood is that the argument itself is faulty.
WHether you are willing to admit it or not, it is murder.
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
Christians, in a practical way, actually believe they are god. Their insistence that no other gods exist means that they are omniscient regarding the universe and beyond, including all forms of existence. Only someone who knows everything can make this determination about the lack of existence of other gods. To know this much means they think they god. But, then why do they spend so much time being angry at someone who doesn't believe in any god?
 

BMS

Well-known member
Christians, in a practical way, actually believe they are god. Their insistence that no other gods exist means that they are omniscient regarding the universe and beyond, including all forms of existence. Only someone who knows everything can make this determination about the lack of existence of other gods. To know this much means they think they god. But, then why do they spend so much time being angry at someone who doesn't believe in any god?
Muslims think there is only one god Allah and his prophet is Mohammed.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Yes this definition has appeared in recent years and is clearly nonsense and need to be ignored until its removed.
That is not how dictionaries work. A position like yours means that you are unable to ever refer to a dictionary. Thanks for letting us know.
Someone's sense of who they think they are, that denies what they are, is a deception. If a 50 year old, has an internal sense of being 14, could they go back to school legally? If a 14 year old boy has a sense of being a 22 year old woman, can he experience menstruation. An inner sense is neither quantifiable nor measurable.
Nobody is talking about "someone's sense of who they think they are". What is under discussion is gender identity, which is "a person's internal sense of being male, female, some combination of male and female, or neither male nor female".
The definition is of a social construct that most people reject
Not in evidence.
 

BMS

Well-known member
That is not how dictionaries work. A position like yours means that you are unable to ever refer to a dictionary. Thanks for letting us know.

Nobody is talking about "someone's sense of who they think they are". What is under discussion is gender identity, which is "a person's internal sense of being male, female, some combination of male and female, or neither male nor female".

Not in evidence.
Come.up with some evidence or reasoning.. there are human beings getting murdered, we cant be mucking about with your opinions
 

Mike McK

Well-known member
So, you acknowledge that no one has the right to take the life of a child in the womb...
I believe that life belongs to each person and no-one has the right to take that life from them .
...but then, you say this:
Everybody has their own moral choice to make, and as long as that choice [abortion] is legal, they have every right to make it unhindered.
This is why nobody takes you seriously.
 
Top