It’s now pretty clear that the Monkey hasn’t had a meaningful connection with any woman who’s lost a pregnancy or even had an abortion, perhaps any woman at all. He would actually chose to bring the pain of forced miscarriage to a hundred couples because that means nothing to him. Even the woman he’s so desperately whiteknighting for don’t feel as callously as he does about the baby growing inside of them.
Nobody said anything about the location of these embryos. That shouldn't matter to the 'life begins at conception and all killing is bad' folks like yourself. 100 embryos or a 5-year-old. Still haven't told us your choice.
He’s spinning since admitting an extant 5 year old has more value in his moral system than 100 embryos invalidates all of his pointless blathering in this thread.
Now he will just:
1) Name call
2) Change the subject
3) Refuse to engage
Classic tactics from an intellectually outmatched LRC poster. Love to see it.
Nobody said anything about the location of these embryos. That shouldn't matter to the 'life begins at conception and all killing is bad' folks like yourself. 100 embryos or a 5-year-old. Still haven't told us your choice.
He’s spinning since admitting an extant 5 year old has more value in his moral system than 100 embryos invalidates all of his pointless blathering in this thread.
Now he will just:
1) Name call
2) Change the subject
3) Refuse to engage
Classic tactics from an intellectually outmatched LRC poster. Love to see it.
It's funny. People can act like 'life begins at conception' but when faced with this simple thought experiment it becomes quite clear that they DO value birthed lives over embryonic 'lives.'
He’s spinning since admitting an extant 5 year old has more value in his moral system than 100 embryos invalidates all of his pointless blathering in this thread.
Now he will just:
1) Name call
2) Change the subject
3) Refuse to engage
Classic tactics from an intellectually outmatched LRC poster. Love to see it.
It's funny. People can act like 'life begins at conception' but when faced with this simple thought experiment it becomes quite clear that they DO value birthed lives over embryonic 'lives.'
Fun to watch their brains explode.
The argument just becomes “that would never happen”
It's funny. People can act like 'life begins at conception' but when faced with this simple thought experiment it becomes quite clear that they DO value birthed lives over embryonic 'lives.'
Fun to watch their brains explode.
The argument just becomes “that would never happen”
Dur Would you rather save an embryo that is one day old or two durr.
The argument just becomes “that would never happen”
Dur Would you rather save an embryo that is one day old or two durr.
pointless scenarios
These Roe apologist monkeys are just complete idiots. I couldn’t have been more quantitative and clearer that I would choose the hundred embryos, even ten embryos, over the 5 year old in the stupid hypothetical scenario even taking it at face value. Yet they are having a circle jerk telling themselves they have found some contradiction of principle in Roe opposers. I’ve even blocked several of them but keep seeing their quoted silliness.
The Monkey has only one tactic: to keep saying you still haven’t told us the answer. Doesn’t matter what you say. It’s as if he has pre-prepared responses irrespective of what the other person says.
It’s as if the kool-aided Monkeys were so ready expecting to trap pro-lifers with philosophical conundrums that force a contradiction of principle that they didn’t even notice that their responses were completely consistent on stated principles, just principles the Monkeys don’t like.
Dur Would you rather save an embryo that is one day old or two durr.
pointless scenarios
These Roe apologist monkeys are just complete idiots. I couldn’t have been more quantitative and clearer that I would choose the hundred embryos, even ten embryos, over the 5 year old in the stupid hypothetical scenario even taking it at face value. Yet they are having a circle jerk telling themselves they have found some contradiction of principle in Roe opposers. I’ve even blocked several of them but keep seeing their quoted silliness.
The Monkey has only one tactic: to keep saying you still haven’t told us the answer. Doesn’t matter what you say. It’s as if he has pre-prepared responses irrespective of what the other person says.
Blocking but still posting anonymously. Interesting! Nice of you to clarify you’d choose 10 embryos over a living human child. That is… horrific.
Thank you finally, clearly stating your position. Yes it was wrapped in paragraphs of needless virtue signaling but at least we are getting somewhere.
It’s as if the kool-aided Monkeys were so ready expecting to trap pro-lifers with philosophical conundrums that force a contradiction of principle that they didn’t even notice that their responses were completely consistent on stated principles, just principles the Monkeys don’t like.
“Philosophical conundrums” are quite important when considering a moral (amoral?) framework to design your laws around.
It’s like you want us to think you’re thoughtless and vapid? Come on!
It took you to tries for that . Since you claim to be “consistent” then your jizz should only be used for procreation,
it’s human and it’s alive .
Since you already admitted this is not the case you clearly are hypocrite like all pro lifers
We should make a law that you legally must be a foster parent if you are of age. To see how quickly “wanting a choice to be a parent” gets mentioned
There are thousands of infants and embryos that need a womb or a home. Interesting I see very little volunteering from the anti-choice camp. It’s only fun to morally posture and virtue signal…. Way way less fun to actually live out those morals.
Dur Would you rather save an embryo that is one day old or two durr.
pointless scenarios
“Thought experiments that cause cognitive dissonance must be mocked - reevaluating my own philosophical framework is far too much work”
Every great philosopher who ever lived would be deeply ashamed for you.
That you feel the need to protect people killing a human-being out of the womb but would willingly kill him/her in the womb is absolutely INSANE, talking about cognitive dissonance... Well it's her body so it's OK.
Dur Would you rather save an embryo that is one day old or two durr.
pointless scenarios
These Roe apologist monkeys are just complete idiots. I couldn’t have been more quantitative and clearer that I would choose the hundred embryos, even ten embryos, over the 5 year old in the stupid hypothetical scenario even taking it at face value. Yet they are having a circle jerk telling themselves they have found some contradiction of principle in Roe opposers. I’ve even blocked several of them but keep seeing their quoted silliness.
The Monkey has only one tactic: to keep saying you still haven’t told us the answer. Doesn’t matter what you say. It’s as if he has pre-prepared responses irrespective of what the other person says.
Very interesting. Under this logic, embryo banks become the most high-value locations in the WORLD. There can be tens of thousands of viable embryos in a single building.
Embryos are discarded every day during the course of IVF treatments. Under what you just said this is tantamount to murder. Quite the position to take. But hey, it's just one five year old burning to death vs. having to admit my philosophical position is completely inconsistent and hilariously poorly thought out. Who's pro-life now?
“Thought experiments that cause cognitive dissonance must be mocked - reevaluating my own philosophical framework is far too much work”
Every great philosopher who ever lived would be deeply ashamed for you.
That you feel the need to protect people killing a human-being out of the womb but would willingly kill him/her in the womb is absolutely INSANE, talking about cognitive dissonance... Well it's her body so it's OK.
The location of the embryos was never stated. If life begins at conception and all lives are valued the same, it shouldn't matter. Got'em :)
It took you to tries for that . Since you claim to be “consistent” then your jizz should only be used for procreation,
it’s human and it’s alive .
Since you already admitted this is not the case you clearly are hypocrite like all pro lifers
We should make a law that you legally must be a foster parent if you are of age. To see how quickly “wanting a choice to be a parent” gets mentioned
There are thousands of infants and embryos that need a womb or a home. Interesting I see very little volunteering from the anti-choice camp. It’s only fun to morally posture and virtue signal…. Way way less fun to actually live out those morals.
Well, it's more likely that these bloviators didn't really follow their 'intellectually and morally consistent' frameworks deeper than surface-level madposting. They didn't even realize how silly their positions were until you called them out. Now they have to find a way to backtrack and pretend that they were ok with babykilling all along. oopsie
It took you to tries for that . Since you claim to be “consistent” then your jizz should only be used for procreation,
it’s human and it’s alive .
Since you already admitted this is not the case you clearly are hypocrite like all pro lifers
We should make a law that you legally must be a foster parent if you are of age. To see how quickly “wanting a choice to be a parent” gets mentioned
So you are saying you believe your jizz should only be used for procreation and you think it’s human an alive. Entertain yourself with your fantasy and practice your religion as you please.
I don’t even use the term pro-life to describe myself and I already clearly explained why but you are too stupid to understand natural language.
Shrill Monkeys often confuse who they are talking to because they don’t care what anyone actually thinks unless they virtue signal in their monkey language. No wonder they don’t understand the English language.
We should make a law that you legally must be a foster parent if you are of age. To see how quickly “wanting a choice to be a parent” gets mentioned
The fact that you think the prospect of a foster child will be unwelcome to me, a random person you know little about, speaks much more about you than anyone else. If anything, you should expect an anti-Roe person to be parenting-friendly.
We should make a law that you legally must be a foster parent if you are of age. To see how quickly “wanting a choice to be a parent” gets mentioned
The fact that you think the prospect of a foster child will be unwelcome to me, a random person you know little about, speaks much more about you than anyone else. If anything, you should expect an anti-Roe person to be parenting-friendly.
How many children are you fostering? If zero, why?
Enough moral posturing. Let’s see some some proof of action.
Anyone can be a hardline dogmatic online. Do you walk the walk?