SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Should God be replaced?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Greg or e who wrote (21088)7/10/2005 11:04:11 AM
From: Solon  Read Replies (1) of 28931
 
"Your answer is entirely circular"

LOL! This is what amuses (and distresses me) about the internet. Clueless people like yourself come online with raw ignorance and then proceed to pick up a smattering of knowledge from their betters. Soon you begin to slather phrases like "red herring, straw men, and circular arguments" around like a child with a jar of peanut butter! You wouldn't know a red herring from a blue oyster, or a circular argument from a syllogism--yet you blithely proceed to strip these and other useful concepts of all meaning by your inappropriate and misleading "responses"!

In the present instance you refer to a simple statement of fact ("that is between a woman and her doctor") with the incorrect assertion that it is "circular".

I swear, you gotta be as dumb as a bucket of axe handles.

___________________________

"I would certainly say that a brain and a nervous system are prerequisite."

"Yet you continue to support a Woman's right to kill an unborn child well past that stage, even half way through actual birth. Why is that?"

WHAT?! You don't know the meaning of "prerequisite"??

As to your unrelated follow-up: NO. But I do support the right to abort the zygote or the fetus; and I support that that right be exercised in a sterile medical environment and that it be a reasoned decision arrived at between a woman and her doctor. As to the why....I have answered that question ad nauseum.

"There are no valid medical reasons for it and unless you support the "right" to kill other disabled children after birth you are simply being dishonest."

Instead of the ad hominems, why don't you try (for a change) to make an argument? When a doctor approves a PBA for a valid medical reason, then you are speaking nonsense to say it is not a valid medical reason--unless you a medically qualified to speak to the issue of medical validity.

As to killing disabled children--you know very well that is not a position I support. After birth, the fetus becomes a child and a citizen. As it is possible to apply Constitutional rights to citizens without violating the rights of others, and as it was the intention of the Founding Fathers to include children in the concept of citizens--therefore a child has the right to life.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News