Abortion: Pro-Choice or Pro-Life?

[Ifreann]

Thread's about abortion, not alimony.

It's surprising you forgot the context faster than Ben Carson's campaign.

It's surprising you continue not to answer my question.

[White Sox]

It's surprising you forgot the context faster than Ben Carson's campaign.

It's surprising you continue not to answer my question.

Did you not read my post?

One party wants the pregnancy to be terminated. The other party doesn't.

Who wins?

Except mine is simply a suggestion. This should have been clear that these were suggestions rather than what should be enforced.

Going back to your point, once again should be consulted with each other and whatever the outcome should be left at that.

Suffering selective reading is widespread

[Ifreann]

It's surprising you continue not to answer my question.

Except mine is simply a suggestion. This should have been clear that these were suggestions rather than what should be enforced.

Going back to your point, once again should be consulted with each other and whatever the outcome should be left at that.

Suffering selective reading is widespread

That doesn't answer my question.

[Ashmoria]

it usually is a mutual decision but if they don't agree then it has to be the woman's choice.

It is but at the same time then it's the choice of a father who did not want a child to provide alimony.

it is the right of the actual born child to have the support of both parents. the father has no right to dismiss that without court approval.

[White Sox]

Suffering selective reading is widespread

That doesn't answer my question.

Alright then.

[The Alma Mater]

That doesn't answer my question.

Alright then.

He is right you know - "they should work it out together" is not an answer to "what if they cannot work it out together".

[White Sox]

Alright then.

He is right you know - "they should work it out together" is not an answer to "what if they cannot work it out together".

If you haven't read my post, then you probably suffer from selective reading.

whatever the outcome should be left at that.

Should still be of mutual agreement but after that any sort of discussion or action is their choice

[Alimprad]

What separates a fetus from something like a puppy, which while it is heartbreaking to kill it, most people would agree you can kill it to remove it if it's lodged in your body and you want it out.

The fact that the foetus' 'lodging' in a pregnant woman's body is a normal function of the body which it is built to cope with.

To use "a child has a right to care and protection from their mother" as justification for "a fetus has a right to care and protection from its host" fails, because in the former case it is possible for someone else to provide. In the latter case it is not.

Rather fine distinctions like that are why analogies can imperceptibly lead to absurd conclusions, and thus why analogies should only ever be illustrative not the foundation of an argument.

exactly why my analogy was just illustrative, and you pointed out why your self, in the latter case, it is not possible to simply remove the foetus from the mother's care and expect it to be ok.

By your logic, we should give the right to life to bacteria, and forget about pasteurization cause #bacterialifematters.

Or maybe by my logic we should give all humans the right to life, and forget about murdering and abortion cause #humanlifematters.

[The V O I D]

I give up on taking Alimprad's arguments seriously. I just can't take them seriously anymore... we've debunked it over, and over, and over, and over... and he still thinks he's right or that he has something to argue with...

[Ardavia]

What separates a fetus from something like a puppy, which while it is heartbreaking to kill it, most people would agree you can kill it to remove it if it's lodged in your body and you want it out.

The fact that the foetus' 'lodging' in a pregnant woman's body is a normal function of the body which it is built to cope with.

Much like how the penis is meant to fit in a vagina, and hence there's not a problem with one showing up in there uninvited, yes?

Or maybe by my logic we should give all humans the right to life, and forget about murdering and abortion cause #humanlifematters.

The right to life is a thing. Everyone has it.

It does not extend to overriding other people's rights, as evidenced by the concept of self-defence being a quite legal and accepted thing.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

By your logic, we should give the right to life to bacteria, and forget about pasteurization cause #bacterialifematters.

Or maybe by my logic we should give all humans the right to life, and forget about murdering and abortion cause #humanlifematters.

Noone is murdering anything by the abortion of a fetus.

[The Alma Mater]

He is right you know - "they should work it out together" is not an answer to "what if they cannot work it out together".

If you haven't read my post, then you probably suffer from selective reading.

whatever the outcome should be left at that.

Should still be of mutual agreement but after that any sort of discussion or action is their choice

Or perhaps you suffer from unclear phrasing. Perhaps formulate your response in a different manner, so that people can understand ?

[Farnhamia]

Let's use the new thread, folks.