It's called not double posting, you really are a piece of work.
Well I don't consider a fetus a "human life". But if you do & you said earlier that you supported abortion for rape. Then your argument is seriously fucked up.
Never called it that, and the fact you're willing to lie about something as small as that shows that you are a pathological liar and cannot be trusted. I said you edited your post to try and get behind me, make me look stupid.
If there was a court case going on for it, then yeah. No point in waiting for a successful trial, actually getting the grand jury to have a doubt enough to indict the person into a actual trial is enough.
If you haven't seen a fatal flaw in that argument, then you probably hate men too..
I added to my post because I had something else I wanted to say. I've been criticized for writing multiple posts in the past and to go back to edit my current post.
Nah man, I know I don't look stupid, now you're just trying to gaslight me, editing your posts and then calling me paranoid, trying to make me second guess myself.
That makes sense, but that doesn't explain why you called me stupid or paranoid. Now I'm beginning to think this is all a ruse to make me look really stupid.
Paranoid because you think I edited my post to make you look stupid.
The question is ridiculous, so I did answer a more realistic form of it. No, an eye for an eye is not "progressive" in any sense of the word, that's some old testament shit which is something pretty much only conservatives and boomers believe in. I would naturally defend my life and/or my family to the death if it truly came to that, but that's a very different subject.
You resorted to name calling. You only think it's the left that needs to learn this, because you always argue with people on the left and insult them, then do this whole victim act.
You aren't seeing babies die, fetus aren't babies.
No, it doesn’t. The risk associated with pregnancy is potential - it’s a possibility, not a definite outcome. The outcome of stealing a kidney is definite and inevitable - you set out to take an organ away, and you do just that. The kidney donation scenario directly violates bodily integrity by *opening someone’s body up and removing an organ*. It doesn’t matter if you’re planning to give it back or not - you shouldn’t have taken it in the first place, the damage is done. By comparison, not assisting someone in the pursuit of abortion violates nothing - pregnancy isn’t an illness, but rather a natural state of being for a woman’s body to be in. Nobody is obligated to intervene in it upon request. The only thing that’s absurd in this exchange so far is that you’ve somehow managed to equate action with inaction, potential harm with definite harm, sickness with health etc. and see absolutely nothing wrong with any of it. I’m not even advocating for any of this and I can see how nonsensical your position is - your analogy is bad. It was bad when you presented it in the past, and it’s bad this time around.
You're not calling out stuff, you're making your point in a provocative way for the purposes of trolling.
