Literally The Current Year And We're Still Having Abortion Debates (On Boyah)

[Kalahari Inkantation]

Idk it's disappointing you start out wanting to create compromises but then reneg

And your natural new york liberal bias

That you equate human life with an animals' is sad.

You're just in denial.

You're just doing a lot of backtracking at this point because you are unable to accept the truth.

Anything to avoid admitting it is human.

Yes cold and factual yet relies upon strawmen that avoid my point.

ypr, what are these

[YPrrrr]

please identify my strawman argument(s)

and again, we are using different definitions of homicide

under the legal definition, i have clearly defined what homicide is and is not

waste of time. The whole Stephanie K thing. That I'm somehow arguing the constitution with you? Consciousness. Personhood. All irrelevant to defining homicide.

And you have not clearly defined homicide you have made excuses as to why homicide is the name of that crime despite it accurately describing the events.

Simple question: is a human zygote a living thing?

What is your definition of "living"?

So you really have no scientific understanding of the situation and this is all a waste of time. Am I living, Descartes?

Idk it's disappointing you start out wanting to create compromises but then reneg

And your natural new york liberal bias

That you equate human life with an animals' is sad.

You're just in denial.

You're just doing a lot of backtracking at this point because you are unable to accept the truth.

Anything to avoid admitting it is human.

Yes cold and factual yet relies upon strawmen that avoid my point.

ypr, what are these

you do realize I was sanitizing you by bringing up new York immediately after you brought up my religion right? Because both are meaningless. The point was to demonstrate how silly your assertion of my bias was. I guess at least you see how it's silly as it pertains to you.

And you are in denial as much as global warming deniers are in denial. You cherry pick science as it fits your viewpoint and ignore it when it doesn't help. You rely on abstract concepts (not cold facts btw) like consciousness and personhood to make an argument against something I'm not even arguing.

You can't even address if a zygote is living because you are worried about the implication of your answer I mean it's silly

[Kalahari Inkantation]

please identify my strawman argument(s)

and again, we are using different definitions of homicide

under the legal definition, i have clearly defined what homicide is and is not

waste of time. The whole Stephanie K thing. That I'm somehow arguing the constitution with you? Consciousness. Personhood. All irrelevant to defining homicide.

if we use terms that are not clearly defined, we will merely argue past each other as a result of misunderstanding, as has been happening for the past few pages now

i have gone out of my way to use the biological definition of life and the legal definition of homicide because those are objectively defined and easily cited

i am striving for semantic accuracy and as such i have updated all my vocabulary to be exactly defined

our word choices are absolutely relevant

you have made excuses as to why homicide is the name of that crime despite it accurately describing the events.

you have once again accused me of something which i am not guilty of

i believe that would be the 8th time

So you really have no scientific understanding of the situation and this is all a waste of time. Am I living, Descartes?

i have no idea what this means, but i get the sense it's another accusation of which i am demonstrably not guilty (#9, i believe)

Idk it's disappointing you start out wanting to create compromises but then reneg

And your natural new york liberal bias

That you equate human life with an animals' is sad.

You're just in denial.

You're just doing a lot of backtracking at this point because you are unable to accept the truth.

Anything to avoid admitting it is human.

Yes cold and factual yet relies upon strawmen that avoid my point.

ypr, what are these

you do realize I was sanitizing you by bringing up new York immediately after you brought up my religion right? Because both are meaningless. The point was to demonstrate how silly your assertion of my bias was. I guess at least you see how it's silly as it pertains to you.

yes, i recognize and respect that

everything you say here is absolutely true

i have since stopped allowing my own preconceived notions to color my perception of you and gone out of my way to keep my personal biases in check (hence my continued insistence on using only formally defined terminology: i am abstaining from using colloquially/personally defined, and thus potentially biased, words)

And you are in denial as much as global warming deniers are in denial.

You cherry pick science as it fits your viewpoint and ignore it when it doesn't help.

You rely on abstract concepts (not cold facts btw) like consciousness and personhood to make an argument against something I'm not even arguing.

You can't even address if a zygote is living because you are worried about the implication of your answer I mean it's silly

these are objectively false accusations #s 10, 11, 12, and 13

where do they keep coming from

[YPrrrr]

You actually ignored the legal definition of homicide and substituted your own explanation using personhood (which is irrelevant).

You linked a Wikipedia article for life that basically said the beginning of life is not agreed upon by all sources so that isn't particularly well defined.

Consciousness isn't well defined.

Personhood as a concept is not well defined. You cite US law for this despite it including many non human entities as persons.

The rest of that post is irrelevant. I get it, you feel you are objective (though you clearly are not)

Anyway. Clearly we are getting nowhere fast and it is in the best interest of boyah if we leave it here. Good debate!

[Kalahari Inkantation]

You actually ignored the legal definition of homicide

in what sense

and substituted your own explanation using personhood (which is irrelevant)

and why is it not relevant

You linked a Wikipedia article for life that basically said the beginning of life is not agreed upon by all sources so that isn't particularly well defined.

but please reread and see for yourself what the most commonly accepted definition in biology is: it has nothing to do with consciousness

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life#Biology

Consciousness isn't well defined.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/consciousness

Personhood as a concept is not well defined. You cite US law for this despite it including many non human entities as persons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhood#United_States

you are conflating personhood with:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood#In_the_United_States

corporate personhood

they may sound similar but they are not, in fact, the same thing

The rest of that post is irrelevant.

no, i quoted your false accusations for good reason

I get it, you feel you are objective (though you clearly are not)

i am trying my best

Clearly we are getting nowhere fast

false

[YPrrrr]

No seriously I'm done lol it's not worth it it's never worth it I apologize to everyone for forgetting that.

[Kalahari Inkantation]

okay

[Kalahari Inkantation]

Obviously somewhat idealistic but I have to morally stand on something I've wavered on so much

I hadn't previously noticed this Very Interesting confession.

[Travis]

@ypr a zygote is technically living in the same way a brain cell or a cancer cell is living. it can't survive on its own and therefore cannot be a victim of homicide imo

[YPrrrr]

I don't want to get dragged back into this doooood

Brain/cancer cells do not possess a unique genome, they are not organisms. A zygote is an organism. It has a genetic pattern to develop its own unique characteristics and all cell types whereas the others are not organisms and cannot develop into anything more complex.

An infant cannot survive on its own either and would require sustenance from the mother or a surrogate source.

Actually here: https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html

That way I don't need to post anymore. You guys are free to disagree! But no more addressing YPR.

Okay the end bye

[don't let's]

This reminds me of the early abortion thread where lawlz tried to argue that it was okay because a fetus couldn't survive on its own without realizing that newborns on up to possibly a few years old can't survive on their own either. And the old or really diseased.

[Hr]

Alternatively, I guess old boyah is a thing that can't be aborted and will never disappear completely.

[Color=transparent]unlike 2.0[/color]

[Travis]

i meant "survive on its own" in the most literal way possible - if a zygote is removed from the womb it will die. a newborn baby, obviously, cannot fend for itself, but it can survive in the world without its mother being present, at least for a little while.

[don't let's]

And in the most literal way possible a newborn can't survive on its own. When the newborn is removed from the womb it will die without help. Sure, it might be able to live for a few days, but, and playing semantics, that's not surviving. And it will die without help. Probably even up to a few years.


(And I know old boyah/outsider/nsider loved playing semantics.)

[Travis]

yes that is exactly what i said

that's still a lot longer than a zygote would survive for

[Thyme]

abort this thread tbh