Stacey Abrams says 'no such thing' as 6-week fetal heartbeat: 'Manufactured sound'

[Chris]

TLG: You quoted something that had nothing to do with my points, and declared victory.

Chris: I quoted what you quoted. The record shows.

TLG: That's not true. I never quoted that portion of the text, because it was unrelated to my points. You quoted irrelevant text, and declared victory.

Chris: You lying SOB

______________________________________


Dear Chris,

If you look below, you'll see that you did NOT quote what I quoted. You quoted a different and unrelated portion of the article, just as I said you did. In the future, please be more careful about calling someone a "lying SOB"

Here is what you quoted from the article (See post#141)



Here is what I quoted from the article




There is no overlap.

Indeed, I first quoted you to point out how you were talking about a fully developed heart, something no one else was talking about. And then I quoted your article against you to show you wrong.

[TheLiquidGuy]

Indeed, I first quoted you to point out how you were talking about a fully developed heart, something no one else was talking about. And then I quoted your article against you to show you wrong.

Chris,

Respectfully, you are confused.

Prior to your post (#141), I made no arguments about heart development.

I only argued about whether a heart beat was audible.

I did quote that article, but I used bold and larger font to emphasize that I was only interested in the portion relating to audibility of a heartbeat. Go look.


I hope this clears things up.

[Chris]

Chris,

Respectfully, you are confused.

Prior to your post (#141), I made no arguments about heart development.

I only argued about whether a heart beat was audible.

I did quote that article, but I used bold and larger font to emphasize that I was only interested in the portion relating to audibility of a heartbeat. Go look.


I hope this clears things up.

No, I just hope others see what I did even though you don't. I'm done with you here. It's just a waste.

[TheLiquidGuy]

No, I just hope others see what I did even though you don't...

No one will. Because you are indeed mistaken here.

[Captdon]

lol. If i keep responding to you, will you go away?

Besides, its true. The scotus opened the flood gates for states to control women.

The states can now protect babies from being murdered. This is the whole of my view.

[Captdon]

Reproductive decisions are deeply personal. Forcing a woman to carry for 9 months and then go through the stress of child birth, and then force them to decide to either keep and raise a child, or give up that child is unlike any control exercised over any man. It is monstrous to allow the state to impose that on their citizens. Any society that allows such a thing has absolutely no business calling itself a free society.

This control is extreme for reasons that ought to be self evident to any reasonable person. If you cannot see how this is different, then its only because you want to play games.

What game? Abortion is murder. It's not a game.

[Captdon]

Happy to debate you on anything. State your position. And if it is sound, I will congratulate you. If not, then it's on.



I am not here to discuss reproductive rights and have no interest in using cheap tricks to superficially win an argument.

I am here to back up my girl Stacy.

The title of the thread is:

Stacey Abrams says 'no such thing' as 6-week fetal heartbeat: 'Manufactured sound'

Yes, she said that.

Yes she was correct.

Change my mind.

Or would you prefer to derail and distract as you have been trying so far?




There is no point in me asserting that it is a Constitutional right, because the SCOTUS has ruled.
Glad you are not against abortion.
No one denies it should be carefully considered, or rare.




I understand that you find my cold logic disturbing. But "No harm no foul" should be a guiding principle of law in a free society. If you cannot identify harm, then you are arbitrarily restricting freedom. I doubt you or any other conservative would want that.

if abortion does not harm anyone, why are you sickened by its use? Do you doubt it is harmless? Or are you just controlled by irrational feelings here?

If you cannot identify harm

Abortion is murder. There's the harm. That it doesn't sicken you is the telling remark.

[TheLiquidGuy]

What game? Abortion is murder. It's not a game.

What about cases of incest and rape? Should abortion be banned even in those cases?

[TheLiquidGuy]

If you cannot identify harm

Abortion is murder. There's the harm. That it doesn't sicken you is the telling remark.

You are not harming a fetus/embryo if there is no mind, no feeling, nobody home. There is nothing there to do harm to.

[Cletus]

You are not harming a fetus/embryo if there is no mind, no feeling, nobody home. There is nothing there to do harm to.

If someone were to ever terminate you in a mugging or home invasion, they could use that defense.

"No harm, no foul, Your Honor."

Now, before you start whining about being picked on, I made this post to point out the absurdity of your position. Something is either alive or it is not. If it is alive and you kill it, you are doing it harm. There is no valid argument against that. Saying it doesn't feel the pain of being chopped up is just a way to excuse your actions. It doesn't change the fact that you are doing great and irreparable harm by snuffing out its life.

In the case of abortion, we are talking about snuffing out a human life. All of us (even you) went through those early stages of development. You didn't change and become something different at 20 weeks or 3 years old or fifty years old. You are still the same person you were during the first trimester of pregnancy.