And I am saying that by suggesting that the foetus or embryo should choose whether or not to be aborted is a crass attempt at evading the question. You have suggested that you can see the need for legal abortion in some circumstances. Name those circumstances. What criteria would you personally accept as justifying an abortion?
The unborn human cant choose at that point, nor can the 1 minute old baby. That is my point. we need to protect the human beings that are vulnerable to ideologues out to kill them for selfish self gratification.
More evasion. You are not looking good here from the point of intellectual integrity. Either run away completely and stop digging the hole you are in, or answer the question put to you several times now. If the criteria for legal abortion are met, who should decide whether the abortion takes place? You seem to be suggesting that it should be anyone prepared to say that it shouldn't, which is obviously nonsense.
Evasion from you because it just answers your question in a way that you don't like. And its fact. It just shows the intransigence and denial we are up against.
No, it was you point chap. You asked who should decide on an abortion, you chose the aggressor and I defended the innocent, which you didn't like. But that is the hatred of woke for us all to see. And you pretending to be all intellectual with your integrity posturing fools no one except your tribal identity group.
You are being ridiculous. Let's take a real example. A woman is dangerously ill and the foetus is deformed and incapable of living outside the womb. An abortion would be legal in the country in question. Who decides if the woman should have the abortion that could save her life?
We have human being's lives at stake here so your indignation is sickening and deranged. Of course the unborn cant choose to live and that is why we contest for it.
As I thought. For your information the sickening can't of the "pro-life" people, who in this case caused a woman's death, so disgusted an entire nation that they voted overwhelmingly to liberalise their abortion laws. Your cant and hypocrisy "pro-life indeed!" will always be self-defeating.
So we can say thousands of human beings die through abortion whereas few women do.... well what a woman actually is
Well selfishness is the major sin really.
I see. So someone who is seeking to preserve their own life at the expense of an already doomed foetus inside them is "selfish", and this is a worse sin than the hypocrisy of those who condemn her to death in the name of "Pro-life". Thank you for so succinctly demonstrating the barbaric morality of the "Pro-life movement.
And we can also say that the death of those unborn humans is considerably less important than the health and well-being of the women who chose to abort them. We can say this with confidence as it corresponds to reality, to how society currently works and how the majority of people think. We can also say that legal, safe, accessible and cheap abortion choices being available to all women regardless of social status is not only humane, but a mark of a civilised, grown-up society. As demonstrated by the societies that adopt this policy and also by the few that don't.
So we contend for the lives of unborn human beings against such dangerous deluded ideologues for the reasons given
The majority, status quo point of view, that informs current abortion policies in most of the developed world is not dangerous, since it removes vulnerable women from danger. It is not deluded since it is based on sound principles. You may not believe in these principles but nevertheless they are soundly based and widely supported. Delusion would consist of thinking that your own opinions should be forced on everyone else, whether they agree or not. There are no ideologues(sic) in play either. Current abortion law, particularly in the UK is practical, effective and very successful. Being driven by ideolgues(sic) would be refusing to accept the right of a woman to choose to have or not have an abortion, if so doing is within the applicable legal framework. Someone who seeks to remove completely the element of choice from the woman, irrespective of the legality of her actions, is someone who can rightly be described as a dangerous, deluded ideologue.
Possibly. Define what you mean by woman.
What a banal, and may I say, highly typical comment. In this instance the person who is pregnant. If you wish to include any trans or gender-neutral definitions, feel free. You might also consider actually addressing the point s made rather than running away to what you amusingly consider to be a safe topic for you.
If you are going to use imaginary social constructs that undermine reality, then you will get challenged on them. This was pointed out to you. Playing the hard done by victim wont wash
Hardly. Give some reasons rather than opinion why you think pretending human beings can be killed because you think they are paracites.