I noted that you jumped into this discussion on the side of Mr. Pale, and you said that he has won several discussions (Can one win a discussion? Does it require that your "adversary" capitulate or be won over?).
Having been out of town for work for a few days I've been thinking this over and this evening I went back and reread much of this thread. Mr. Pale has basically been baiting me. He has refused to actually discuss the questions I've asked--such as how will we deal with 1,000,000 unwanted babies each year if we outlaw abortion. I also said that I think that killing fetus' was preferable to killing babies and children--which is what happens when unwilling parents are forced to take care of them. I never said it was a good solution to kill the fetus', just a better one than the alternative.
Mr. Pale also seems to feel that women are breeding machines who should not be allowed to control their own reproductive organs--something with which I disagree. Even in cases of rape, the woman has no rights. When Pale gets raped and then signs up for an ectopic pregnancy with the sperm of the man who raped him (and a suitable egg donor) and carries it to term with a C-section delivery, then, and only then can he come back and talk to me about women's rights. Until that happens he's no different than the Pope lecturing on sex techniques.
"You are lying mare. You are unable to argue my points, so you make up lies in an effort to deflect the discussion away from your inability to argue the points." Quote from post #267 on the abortion thread. Thus I refute his repeated statement that he has no called me a liar.
If you and Pale feel that he has won this discussion, then I suggest you go out for a beer and celebrate your somewhat pyrrhic victory.
