Kermit Jizz said:
Chill dude, don't be so defensive.
Nice, projection/deflection combo, a fine attempt at being condescending.
Kermit Jizz said:
I hate to break it to you, but this entire debate is subjective.
That would be really convenient for you and so obviously that's how you'd like to frame it, but you're wrong. Almost nothing about this is subjective. The only thing that is technically subjective is whether human life has intrinsic value or not, and the good thing about that is anyone who says it doesn't can and should be immediately dismissed.
As for the rest, well, it's mostly biology and common sense. You shouldn't have the right to end an innocent human life, especially if your purposeful actions lead to its conception. That's it, period. Sorry you don't like being pregnant, so don't get pregnant.
Kermit Jizz said:
And? People disagree, so what? That doesn't say anything about their individual stances. Instead of looking at it as all pro lifers on one side and all pro choice on the other, realize that all those different abortion cutoffs come from different lines of reasoning. I guarantee I can find so kooky pro-lifer beliefs to tag onto you, but that would be gay and pointless.
People can disagree all they like, it just helps my argument. With no logical consistency on your side at all it's clear you're all running on feelings and opinions, not facts. By all means, keep disagreeing.
Different lines of reasoning can exist but only the truth matters, there's only one right answer, and it's the fact that human life starts at conception. That is indisputable. You can say human life has no value until whatever arbitrary stage in development, or even that it never has value, but nobody cares what you think. The issue is, are we needlessly ending an innocent human life? If the answer is yes, it mustn't be allowed.
That's why you'll see abortion fags cling to their dehumanization tactics so tightly. Clump of cells, can't feel pain, parasite, unviable, etc. All irrelevant and pathetic.
This logic is bad and used by pedos. There never is a firm line between to different points in a transitional process. You could go down the line until you say "what's the difference between a sperm and a corpse", but that would get you nowhere. Hell you can use that logic backwards and say what's the difference between a sperm and an egg the moment of and just before conception -> all eggs and sperm are sacred. You have to draw subjective arbitrary cut offs with these things. Conception is no less arbitrary.
The logic is fine, and I don't care about your irrelevant knowledge about how pedophiles think, take it up with a psychologist.
There are firm lines in plenty of transition processes. For example, human life transitions from non-existent to existent upon conception. That's really where this argument should end.
Nonsense like your sperm/corpse shit makes you sound dumb. At least your "what's the difference between sperm & egg the moment of and just before conception" is coherent, but still something a child would ask.
So I'll answer, little Timmy: The difference is a sperm and egg aren't human life, never were nor can they ever be. A skin cell off my ass can't ever be a person either; shocking, I know.
Saying conception is arbitrary is false, and you make no compelling argument for that. It's factually when life begins, so explain how it's arbitrary.
You did not answer my question though, why is conception special to you?
It was a pointless question to me. I don't care about what is special as it pertains to this issue in the context of a debate. Irrelevant things are distractions.
If you insist however, from a personal perspective, it's simple. As a Christian the unborn are important. "For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb." - Psalms 139:13
I don't argue from religion, however. My concerns are of purely logical and biological matters, with, of course, some general morality which even decent Atheists share: don't kill babies.
