Reply to thread

Irrelevant.  Sophistry.


If the topic was the murder of post-natals you wouldn't be so quick to look for "middle ground" to make it more difficult for the state to prevent and prosecute such murders that do "too much bodily harm".


But, because it is inconvenient for you to accept the decades-old scientific reality that a person, a unique individual human being, begins to live at the moment of conception, you thereby attempt to sophistrically approve of murderous abortion.


:rolleyes:


Again, if you have a clear accurate on-point scientifically formulated refutation to the opening post, then please post it.





Implied ad hominem.


Here you deliberately implicitly attack those of us who recognize the existence and right to life of newly conceived people as being "full of bull" in an erroneous guilt by association inference.


Just because you're a sophister, does not make your debate adversaries sophisters.


Your irrational illogic and veiled ad hominem attack is recognized and rejected.


Again, if you have a clear accurate on-point scientifically formulated refutation to the opening post, then please post it.


Back
Top