Pro-abortionists are anti-science

[Darth Executor]

It's the litmus test of true Evangelicalism.

But I'm not even Protestant, let alone Evangelical.

[Darth Executor]

It wasn't blindingly obvious to many of you even a few years ago. And no, I don't go on and on about it, I didn't even bring it up. I just find it hilarious that every atheist liberal zombie on this board suddenly thinks it's "blindingly obvious" when most of you were arguing something else even a few years ago. It's like with gay marriage, where proglodytes viciously attack anyone who opposes it even though most of them opposed it themselves just a few years ago.

[Mountain Man]

Can you give specific examples of liberals who claim that a fetus is not a human life? Otherwise, I'm assuming that your question is a strawman.

Talk about strawmen...

I never said they denied it, I said they ignored it in favor of dogma.

[Mountain Man]

Why don't you find somebody else to bother.

If you're not willing to discuss the topic then please leave the thread.

[Mountain Man]

No-one is denying that a "developing fetus is a human life" you moron, of course it is. What else would it be, a frog? The issue is the significance we give to each stage of development. The majority agree that fetal viability is the appropriate time to grant the fetus full human rights and protections.

The irony here is that you think you're rebutting my argument, but you're actually affirming it.

Let's assume it's true that liberals, in general, don't deny that a fetus is a human life.* For any reasonable person, accepting that basic fact would be the end of the debate, but liberals are not reasonable people and choose to ignore this "inconvenient truth" in favor of the distinctly unscientific position of arbitrarily assigning value to human life. It's dogma, pure and simple. Yet on topics like global warming, they lecture us on the value of basing government policy on "settled science". So why isn't "settled science" sufficient to decide the abortion issue?


* The fact is, many liberals downplay the scientific reality that a fetus is a human life and use dehumanizing terms like "parasite" and "lump of tissue" when describing the unborn.

[Mountain Man]

The point was that a claim was made in the OP that doesn't apply. Liberals aren't in the habit of claiming that a fetus isn't human, and so liberals aren't anti-science in the matter. Consequently, the OP is presenting a dishonest (or strawman) argument, or is at least misguided.

Here's the opening post. Please read it again, because you and others are grossly misrepresenting what actually wrote:

Did you know that pro-abortionists are anti-science? It's true. It is an undeniable scientific fact that a developing fetus is a human life. Look at any scientific text that details the development of a human being and it will always start with the moment of conception. The zygote is a living organism that if given the same protection afforded any other human life, will, barring complications, develop into a fully functioning human being. But pro-abortionists ignore these facts and instead base their entire argument on the wholly unscientific position of assigning arbitrary value to human life.

That is to say that pro-abortionists ignore science in favor of dogma. It's ironic that this is what they accuse Christians of doing.

I even highlighted a couple of key phrases for your convenience. Nowhere did I accuse liberals/pro-abortionists of denying science.

Now how about addressing what I actually wrote instead of your strawman version of it?

[Sea of red]

Come on he made those comments years ago, so following the logic you laid down in your defense of your buddy Starlight, it's totally cool now. Although it is revealing you get all upset about killing those who commit adultry, but don't care if someone says it's fine to kill infants. I will enjoy watching you twist yourself into a pretzel rather than admit your wrong.

Go jump off a cliff.

[Jedidiah]

It wasn't blindingly obvious to many of you even a few years ago. And no, I don't go on and on about it, I didn't even bring it up. I just find it hilarious that every atheist liberal zombie on this board suddenly thinks it's "blindingly obvious" when most of you were arguing something else even a few years ago. It's like with gay marriage, where proglodytes viciously attack anyone who opposes it even though most of them opposed it themselves just a few years ago.

They have moved on from denying that a fetus is human, to defining away it's humanity.

[Jedidiah]

Go jump off a cliff.

Good refutation.

[Sea of red]

They have moved on from denying that a fetus is human, to defining away it's humanity.

The latter of which is correct.

[Sea of red]

Good refutation.

To a not so good person.

[lilpixieofterror]

Go jump off a cliff.

What's the problem, don't like it when someone points out your double standards? Let me guess, DE has Christian on his profile so everything he says is bad, but Starlight has atheist on his so you'll excuse everything he says away?

BTW being accused of not being a good person by someone who excuses away someone who wants it legal to kill children is a badge of honor and considering those who are on your hate list, I'm glad to be among them. Keep defending infanticide hypocrite.

[Mountain Man]

Go jump off a cliff.

You're done. As the originator of this thread, I am asking you to refrain from posting here. Go spread your vitriol elsewhere.

[lilpixieofterror]

Well, you are much more familiar with that than me.

Nice avoiding the point to score points, but the truth still stands.

[Tassman]

It wasn't blindingly obvious to many of you even a few years ago. And no, I don't go on and on about it, I didn't even bring it up. I just find it hilarious that every atheist liberal zombie on this board suddenly thinks it's "blindingly obvious" when most of you were arguing something else even a few years ago.

It's like with gay marriage, where proglodytes viciously attack anyone who opposes it even though most of them opposed it themselves just a few years ago.