Abortion Is Equal To Murder?

[Tassman]

Nonsense Tass, that thread I started about infanticide disputes your definition of personhood and you had NO RATIONAL response. You had no logical argument against those atheist philosophers. Like I said, these are only cultural differences base on evolved instincts... No big deal...

I do not agree with the rationale of the OP, it is an extremist, minority position. The rational response is that once a fetus has attained viability and could survive outside its mother's womb, usually at the end of the second trimester, then it is entitled to the protection of law. But, this aside, there is no doubt that once birth has occurred then it is a "person" whether Jewish or whatever.

[seer]

I do not agree with the rationale of the OP, it is an extremist, minority position. The rational response is that once a fetus has attained viability and could survive outside its mother's womb, usually at the end of the second trimester, then it is entitled to the protection of law. But, this aside, there is no doubt that once birth has occurred then it is a "person" whether Jewish or whatever.

No Tass, that is merely your opinion, logically why is your definition more correct or right? And remember in this country the right to abortion was once a minority position, so that distinction does not wash.

[Cow Poke]

I do not agree with the rationale of the OP, it is an extremist, minority position. The rational response is that once a fetus has attained viability and could survive outside its mother's womb, usually at the end of the second trimester, then it is entitled to the protection of law. But, this aside, there is no doubt that once birth has occurred then it is a "person" whether Jewish or whatever.

Let's see, the OP, by which you seem exceptionally triggered, states thus:

This is a syllogism by a cyber friend from New Zealand, Bnonn Tennant. I think the logic is solid.

1.It is wrong to kill another human being for personal reasons (because it is murder)

2.A human zygote or fetus is a human being

3.Therefore, it is wrong to kill a human zygote or fetus for personal reasons

https://bnonn.com/why-abortion-is-ir...ent-to-murder/

So, let's see what the law says...

Currently, at least 38 states have fetal homicide laws: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. At least 29 states have fetal homicide laws that apply to the earliest stages of pregnancy ("any state of gestation/development," "conception," "fertilization" or "post-fertilization")

source

Now, let's analyze your nutty post in the light of FACTS:

I do not agree with the rationale of the OP,

I'm shocked. Shocked, I say.

it is an extremist, minority position.

FALSE on both counts.

The rational response is that once a fetus has attained viability and could survive outside its mother's womb, usually at the end of the second trimester, then it is entitled to the protection of law.

PATENTLY FALSE.

But, this aside, there is no doubt that once birth has occurred then it is a "person" whether Jewish or whatever.

To quote that great theologian, Tassman, "Nonsense!"

Unfortunately, RoeVWade made a major exception to these INFANTICIDE cases by excluding abortion.

[One Bad Pig]

True!

"Conservative definitions [of genocide] emphasize intentional actions and policies of governments that result in very large population losses, usually from direct killing. More liberal definitions call for less stringent criteria for intent, focusing more on outcomes. They do not necessarily require direct sanction by state authorities; rather, they identify societal forces and actors. They also allow for several intersecting forces of destruction, including dispossession and disease".

http://americanhistory.oxfordre.com/...0199329175-e-3

Much the same can be said of the Australian treatment of aborigines as with the native Americans. Not something for which either nation can be proud.

You appear to be sidestepping the point, which was the government-sanctioned massacre of aborigines. That's why there are no native Tasmanians today.

[Tassman]

Let's see, the OP, by which you seem exceptionally triggered,

I was responding to the OP in seer's 'Infanticide thread' to which he specifically referred.

[Tassman]

You appear to be sidestepping the point, which was the government-sanctioned massacre of aborigines. That's why there are no native Tasmanians today.

That was over a century ago, which doesn't excuse it. But the government and people have recognised the atrocities committed against the aboriginal people of Australia and officially apologised for it in parliament. Sadly, it was not uncommon during the colonial expansions worldwide to mistreat the indigenous people of the invaded country...this includes the US.

[Tassman]

No Tass, that is merely your opinion, logically why is your definition more correct or right? And remember in this country the right to abortion was once a minority position, so that distinction does not wash.

Leaving aside your misguided attempt to claim a universal god-mandated moral law, which you've never been able to show, my response was to your erroneous equating of abortion with the Jewish holocaust. Leaving aside the dispute about fetal personhood, there is no doubt that at birth legal protection obtains for ALL people, including Jews. In short, you were presenting a false equivalence between the rights of fetus' and Jews.

[seer]

Leaving aside your misguided attempt to claim a universal god-mandated moral law, which you've never been able to show, my response was to your erroneous equating of abortion with the Jewish holocaust. Leaving aside the dispute about fetal personhood, there is no doubt that at birth legal protection obtains for ALL people, including Jews. In short, you were presenting a false equivalence between the rights of fetus' and Jews.

Nonsense Tass, all the Nazi culture had to do was declare to Jews as subhuman - as we are doing with the unborn. It does matter if you agree or not, your opinion on what constitutes a "person" or who gets "rights" is just as arbitrary as the Nazis'. And you are correct - we can't equate the two - abortion, by numbers, is much worse. 50 million of our own offspring slaughtered since Roe in my country alone...

[Tassman]

Nonsense Tass, all the Nazi culture had to do was declare to Jews as subhuman - as we are doing with the unborn. It does matter if you agree or not, your opinion on what constitutes a "person" or who gets "rights" is just as arbitrary as the Nazis'.

Again, it's a false equivalence. One cannot compare an insensate embryo/fetus with a born human being.

And you are correct - we can't equate the two - abortion, by numbers, is much worse. 50 million of our own offspring slaughtered since Roe in my country alone...

[Cow Poke]

Calm yourself, DQ, you're going to have a stroke. Some of us don't believe evolution is nonsense, and many of us don't believe environmentalism is a farce.

Why do you promote such garbage in the name of anti-Christian hate?

[Tassman]

Calm yourself, DQ, you're going to have a stroke. Some of us don't believe evolution is nonsense,

Many of you do.

and many of us don't believe environmentalism is a farce.

This from the person who thinks sustainable farming is sufficient to prevent climate change.

Why do you promote such garbage in the name of anti-Christian hate?

I don't.

[Cow Poke]

This from the person who thinks sustainable farming is sufficient to prevent climate change.

You are proving once again how badly your reading comprehension sucks, Tassy.

[Tassman]

You are proving once again how badly your reading comprehension sucks, Tassy.

Nothing there!

[seer]

Again, it's a false equivalence. One cannot compare an insensate embryo/fetus with a born human being.

Who says? You? They are after all both human. Ontologically what is the difference?




What lies? Have we not slaughtered 50 million of our own offspring?

[Cow Poke]

Nothing there!

This is one of those substantive posts you're always whining about?