"We keep marrying other species and ethnics " - Fox News Host

PostmodernProphet said:
here, in this thread, in his comments about the unborn, there are no contradictions......games you want to play regarding his comments in other threads win you no arguments here and are a waste of our time.....I can see why you would be eager to crow about earlier victories, since you will have none here.......
Click to expand...

Oh...so views are confined to this thread?

I can exit this thread, and say something that is basically the opposite of what I said here, and be correct in both cases?

That's interesting....
 
Onceler said:
Oh...so views are confined to this thread?

I can exit this thread, and say something that is basically the opposite of what I said here, and be correct in both cases?

That's interesting....
Click to expand...

what he may have done somewhere else does not invalidate what he did correctly here.....if you want to win this argument you need to win it, not complain that what he says here contradicts something he said somewhere else.....I'm simply pointing out that he is NOT wrong here, and you are......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
what he may have done somewhere else does not invalidate what he did correctly here.....if you want to win this argument you need to win it, not complain that what he says here contradicts something he said somewhere else.....I'm simply pointing out that he is NOT wrong here, and you are......
Click to expand...

And I'm just pointing out that any opinion that is rendered by Dixie is completely invalid, by virtue of the fact that he has argued the opposite.

If you want to cling to the words of someone who has basically stated both sides of the argument with conviction, and is essentially unstable, that's your choice.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
the same logic would apply.....I would expect the mother to make the same decision she would have made with the unborn child....the emotional decision....it's what makes mothers, mothers.....
Click to expand...

So you agree the decision to have an abortion should be left up to the woman.

That's the beauty of boards like this one. Rational adults discussing and coming to rational conclusions.

I'm taking off for a week or so. A little get-away. It's nice to be leaving on that note.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
one of the steps involved in selling eggs was candling, where we would hold each egg up against a light to make sure an embryo had not started growing.....if you didn't take that step you weren't doing your customers any favors......

candling_210.jpg


if something was growing, it was a chicken, not an elephant.....
Click to expand...

The eggs were fresh. A day or two didn't make any difference.
 
apple0154 said:
So you agree the decision to have an abortion should be left up to the woman.

That's the beauty of boards like this one. Rational adults discussing and coming to rational conclusions.

I'm taking off for a week or so. A little get-away. It's nice to be leaving on that note.
Click to expand...

What tilme will you be here, cutie?
 
Onceler said:
And I'm just pointing out that any opinion that is rendered by Dixie is completely invalid, by virtue of the fact that he has argued the opposite.
Click to expand...

that, however, is irrational....even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and if he has argued true opposites, obviously he was right at least once.....
 
apple0154 said:
So you agree the decision to have an abortion should be left up to the woman.
Click to expand...

/boggle....and you deny you are blonde.....no, I said I expected the mother to make a particular decision.....and, ironically, in both scenarios, I said I expected the mother to try to sacrifice her life for her child.....in neither case did I say the law should accept her decision.....now how, from all that, did you come to the conclusion I said we should let the decision for abortion be made by the mom?.......
 
Dixie said:
No, I am sorry, you are factually wrong, and wherever you got that information is incorrect. An embryo/fetus is a living organism, not "material" which has to develop into a living human organism. This goes beyond "common sense," it is biology. It doesn't matter how many erroneous examples of eggs or whatever you come up with, the facts are the facts. If we were talking about something as trivial as chickens and eggs, I might let you get away with the lie, but we are talking about a human being, and the fact that you fully understand the process of life as it pertains to eggs and chickens, tells me you understand a fetus and embryo are not simply "material" which has to develop into something.

Now apple, if you just want to continue repeating yourself, posting the same erroneous argument over and over, that's fine, I will continue to quote you and correct your lies. Until you can put up some evidence to support your claims, you have not made a point, and you know what? You won't make one, because the evidence you need doesn't exist. But we can just keep on repeating ourselves over and over again, from now until the end of time, if that's what you want to do. This won't ever be one of those things where the person who gets the last word in, wins the debate. The actual debate hasn't even begun yet, because we can't debate something that isn't debatable. Until you come to terms with the truth, and accept what abortion is, the intentional killing of a human life, then we are stuck at the gate. Once you accept the truth of what we are doing, then we can have a meaningful philosophical debate over when it is ethical to kill human beings.
Click to expand...

Fine. All I ask of you is in your every day life refer to things as you refer to embryos/fetuses. The next time you meet a child refer to them as a doctor because they may very well become a doctor. And when you're looking for chocolate covered cashews be sure to specify chocolate covered cashew trees.

As you correctly stated until one comes to term with the truth we're stuck at the gate and the easiest way to get past the gate is to do as I suggested.

When you drive past a hole in the ground that is the result of an excavation for a basement comment on how beautiful the house is. There will be a house there because the probability of a house being there is much greater than the probability a fertilized egg will ever become a human being. (For the fertilized egg the odds are less than 50/50.)

Or should one ask your opinion of the caviar they're serving be sure to say the fish was magnificent.

Regardless of the people/situations you encounter in your life it shouldn't take long before you realize the arguments used by anti-abortionists are ludicrous in any other given situation.
 
apple0154 said:
Fine. All I ask of you is in your every day life refer to things as you refer to embryos/fetuses. The next time you meet a child refer to them as a doctor because they may very well become a doctor. And when you're looking for chocolate covered cashews be sure to specify chocolate covered cashew trees.

As you correctly stated until one comes to term with the truth we're stuck at the gate and the easiest way to get past the gate is to do as I suggested.

When you drive past a hole in the ground that is the result of an excavation for a basement comment on how beautiful the house is. There will be a house there because the probability of a house being there is much greater than the probability a fertilized egg will ever become a human being. (For the fertilized egg the odds are less than 50/50.)

Or should one ask your opinion of the caviar they're serving be sure to say the fish was magnificent.

Regardless of the people/situations you encounter in your life it shouldn't take long before you realize the arguments used by anti-abortionists are ludicrous in any other given situation.
Click to expand...

this is really getting lame....the error you keep repeating is substitution of the word "human" for the word "adult"......there is no logical basis for doing so and basing your entire argument upon that substitution doesn't really get you anywhere......student would be to graduate (doctor) as infant would be to adult.......not as infant would be to human being......
 
Last edited:
ib1yysguy said:
Tell me if you can spot the contradiction:

Biological scientists, he'll tell you, aren't in the business of proving things to be facts. It cannot be done because science doesn't deal with proving "facts." He says this constantly whenever someone brings up evolutionary theory.
Then in this thread he goes on to continually repeat something he says is a biological (read: scientific) fact.
Click to expand...

Yah Yah Yah Yah!! You can't argue that a human embryo or fetus is not a living human being, so you resort to distraction and confusion. This is a typical pinhead tactic when losing an argument badly. You lack the evidence to support your viewpoint, so you want to change the subject to ME! I am flattered, but I am not the topic here!

Science doesn't conclude facts. Science makes predictions, through observation of these predictions, we can establish probabilities, and these probabilities are often the basis for conclusions made by man, which is the supporting basis for fact. Science doesn't say a fetus is human as a fact, it tells us that the life process of humans begins at conception. We observe that prediction, and we see the probability of the life process beginning at some other point, is nil. Therefore, we can conclude with reasonable certainty, it is a "fact" that human life begins at conception. When I say "it is biological fact" it means that mankind has concluded this as a fact based on science, not science itself.

Now you can't refute this, because science gives us no evidence of anything to the contrary. There is no basis for any other belief with regard to when human life begins. But since you don't want to accept that reality, you are relegated to distracting and diverting the topic, which is what you people do best! Too bad it does nothing for you in this argument.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
here, in this thread, in his comments about the unborn, there are no contradictions......games you want to play regarding his comments in other threads win you no arguments here and are a waste of our time.....I can see why you would be eager to crow about earlier victories, since you will have none here.......
Click to expand...

The idea that someone doesn't need to be consistent in their thinking from thread to thread is a weird arbitrary segmentation of thought that could ONLY come from a conservative. Yes, posters are liable to get their own words quoted back to them on this forum when they contradict themselves. Dixie does it more frequently than most because he's a schizo.
 
Dixie, give it up. You have been hopelessly exposed on this.

We get it; of course there are such things as scientific facts when it is convenient for your argument, but clearly, there is NO WAY that anything can be proven as fact when it isn't convenient.
 
Fine. All I ask of you is in your every day life refer to things as you refer to embryos/fetuses. The next time you meet a child refer to them as a doctor because they may very well become a doctor. And when you're looking for chocolate covered cashews be sure to specify chocolate covered cashew trees.
Click to expand...

I don't understand the point you are trying to make, a fetus is human life, unlike a child who is not yet a doctor. I realize how you can make such lame examples up, in your mind a fetus is not a human life, so you can easily find comparisons to things that aren't what they may become someday. But the fact is, a fetus is already a human being, it doesn't require anything else to become a human being, it is in an early stage of development, but it is indeed a living human organism in the state of being. A fetus isn't an adult, just as a little boy is not a man, but that doesn't change the fact that a fetus, like a little boy, is a human being.

You keep throwing up this stupid chicken egg example, but chickens are not humans, they have a completely different reproductive system. With a chicken, the "womb" is a shell, and the "fetus" is delivered outside of the mother's body, where it is then incubated until it hatches underneath the mother. If you remove the incubating egg from under the mother, it is not going to be anything other than an egg, just as if you remove an egg from the womb of a human, it will never be anything but an egg. In either case, once the egg has been fertilized a living organism begins to grow, in the case of a chicken, it is a chicken life form, in the case of a human, it is human life. If we destroy a chicken life form, it's not a big deal, we kill billions of chickens every year. We are discussing the killing of a human being. It's incredibly insulting and offensive for you to continue trying to draw a comparison between the two. Does your value of human life equate to your value of a chicken's life? If so, that would explain your view.
 
Onceler said:
And I'm just pointing out that any opinion that is rendered by Dixie is completely invalid, by virtue of the fact that he has argued the opposite.

If you want to cling to the words of someone who has basically stated both sides of the argument with conviction, and is essentially unstable, that's your choice.
Click to expand...

That's precisely why anti-abortionist's arguments are not taken seriously. Just as them claiming an embryo/fetus is a human being but having no problem supporting a woman with a defective body having the right to kill it.

It's like the "no stem cell research" regarding fertilized eggs. They prefer the "human beings" be flushed down the toilet rather than contribute to the benefit of all mankind.

How can there be any semblance of a coherent discussion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top