Abortion Double Standard

in summary,

i made a statement

you treated my statement as if it were a DEBATE RESOLUTION

sure, ok, fine

you spun wild tangents

that concluded with your claim that you personally believei was trying to say "killing a child is not murder"

instead of simply asking me, "are you suggesting that killing a child is not murder?"

to which i would answer, "no, that is not what i am suggesting"

it's more like, "when a mother kills her own child within the first 12 months after that child is born, it is often, but not always, treated as infanticide by the legal system (at least in canada) and as such, usually carries a penalty of less than one year in jail, which compares favorably in contrast to a mandatory life sentence for second degree murder"

this rephrasing of my original statement, more accurately reflects my original intent and does not constitute any shift whatsoever from my original position

Women not only get pregnant but have to carry the baby, feed and nurture it for a while.

Whereas the man need only ejaculate into a women and most do prematurely. But the burden of parenting is disproportionate. Hence the double standards.

For a fourth time, this is an absurd, outrageous straw man that completely and totally misrepresents my argument by taking them so far out their clear and unambiguous context that no reasonable could have possible interpreted my comments in this way.

You say that a mother killing a child is not murder.

You simply took my argument wildly out of context in order to pretend I’m claiming something that no rational human being could possibly think I’m claiming. This is a massive straw man.

By all means, walk me through your logic here:

We were both talking about infanticide, about the treatment of mothers who kill their children, whether it was murder, how the law for infanticide is interpreted, how the punishment for that law applies to those mothers deciding to murder their kids. You say that a mother killing a child is not murder.

On what basis did you conclude, given that clear context, that talking about you suggesting that  “killing a child is not murder” in reference to your specific claim about mothers - that I am suddenly and out of absolutely nowhere talking about any child murder by anyone? Especially given that neither before or since have I talked at any point mentioned or argued about anything other than mothers?

On what basis do you feel it needs a fifth, what is wrong with the previous four that you feel necessitates need writing another argument after you’ve ignored the previous four?

your failure to communicate with the person you are speaking to

On what basis do you feel it needs a fifth, what is wrong with the previous four that you feel necessitates need writing another argument after you’ve ignored the previous four?

--> @Shila

Women not only get pregnant but have to carry the baby, feed and nurture it for a while.

Whereas the man need only ejaculate into a women and most do prematurely. But the burden of parenting is disproportionate. Hence the double standards.

the asymmetry comes from the ability to "opt out"

if the mother chooses to "opt out" this results in the death of the fetus

if the father chooses to "opt out" the consequences are much less dire

since the stakes are much lower for the father and much higher for the mother

why would the mother be given a chance to "opt out" while the father is given no such option ?

Women want the right to decide over their own bodies and ovaries. That is why their movement is called Pro Choice.

As you haven’t bothered to contest anything I’ve said:

i've repeatedly pointed out where you've misquoted me

In a civil debate - you don’t repeatedly ignore the opposing argument, and when someone points out you are engaging in an outrageous straw man by taking the things he’s saying so far out of its obvious context that it beggars belief - you don’t simply ignore that argument and restate the same straw man.

i've repeatedly pointed out where you've misquoted me

LOL!!! The sheer level of your hypocrisy knows no bounds. LOL!!! 

That's their forte, to constantly misquote, misinterpret, and mischaracterize what another says. They have done it to me too, on more than one thread.  

--> @Shila

Women want the right to decide over their own bodies and ovaries. That is why their movement is called Pro Choice.

men want the right to decide who they work for, you know, with their bodies

men want the right to decide who they work for, you know, with their bodies

But Abortion is performed on a woman’s body. Shouldn’t she have rights over her own body?

--> @Shila

men want the right to decide who they work for, you know, with their bodies

But Abortion is performed on a woman’s body. Shouldn’t she have rights over her own body?

yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes

compare and contrast

a mother who kills her own child within the first 12 months

a father who kill his own child within the first 12 months

> @Shila

 Talking of cunts.

Q. What is the only animal with a cunt in the middle of it's back?

--> @zedvictor4

> @Shila

 Talking of cunts.

Q. What is the only animal with a cunt in the middle of it's back?

How long did it take you to find out you were in the wrong place before you corrected yourself?

Vici: excellent point - tremendous