Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,927 Year: 4,184/9,624 Month: 1,055/974 Week: 14/368 Day: 14/11 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Abortion questions...?
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4671 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 256 of 403 (602525)
01-28-2011 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by Taq
01-28-2011 5:44 PM


Re: Evidence?
So we are to use a different definition here at EvC then the rest of society ?
Because, as I showed, pro-abortion already has a definition. You can't change it because you don't like it ...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Taq, posted 01-28-2011 5:44 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by Taq, posted 01-28-2011 6:03 PM slevesque has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 257 of 403 (602527)
01-28-2011 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by slevesque
01-28-2011 5:46 PM


Re: Evidence?
slevesque writes:
So a pro-choice is automatically pro-abortion....
You admit that it's nuanced and then you ignore the nuance.
No, pro-choice is not automatically pro-abortion. As I said, I'm anti-abortion.
To add yet another analogy, I'm pro-drug-legalization but I'm anti-drug-use.
You have to use the nuance whether your pet dictionary mentions it or not. That isn't an EvC exception. It's English. Do it right or expect to be called on it again and again.

"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 5:46 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:18 PM ringo has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10085
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 258 of 403 (602529)
01-28-2011 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by slevesque
01-28-2011 5:51 PM


Re: Evidence?
So we are to use a different definition here at EvC then the rest of society ?
Nope. Same definition. You even stated that we are for legalization, so why not call us pro-legalization? You have to break your own rules to call it pro-abortion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 5:51 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:12 PM Taq has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4671 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 259 of 403 (602531)
01-28-2011 6:12 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by Taq
01-28-2011 6:03 PM


Re: Evidence?
I guess I can call you pro-abortion-legalization
'cause pro-legalization is not specific to what is to be legalized (unless, I guess, it could apply to someone who wants ot legalize everything)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Taq, posted 01-28-2011 6:03 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by jar, posted 01-28-2011 6:18 PM slevesque has replied
 Message 264 by Taq, posted 01-28-2011 6:23 PM slevesque has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4671 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 260 of 403 (602533)
01-28-2011 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by ringo
01-28-2011 5:59 PM


Re: Evidence?
This has nothing to do with any sort of pet dictionnary. This is a universal definition. I have yet to find any definition that diverges from what I am telling you the definition is.
When a creationist comes in with a wrong definition of the word ''evolution'', you correctly refer him to the dictionnary definition of the word. Why can't the same apply here ? Why do you accept the dictionnary definition of a word only when you like it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by ringo, posted 01-28-2011 5:59 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by ringo, posted 01-28-2011 6:32 PM slevesque has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 425 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 261 of 403 (602534)
01-28-2011 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by slevesque
01-28-2011 6:12 PM


Re: Evidence?
slevesque writes:
I guess I can call you pro-abortion-legalization
'cause pro-legalization is not specific to what is to be legalized (unless, I guess, it could apply to someone who wants ot legalize everything)
Did abortion still happen when it was illegal?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:12 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:20 PM jar has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4671 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 262 of 403 (602535)
01-28-2011 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by jar
01-28-2011 6:18 PM


Re: Evidence?
yes

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by jar, posted 01-28-2011 6:18 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 263 by jar, posted 01-28-2011 6:21 PM slevesque has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 425 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 263 of 403 (602537)
01-28-2011 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by slevesque
01-28-2011 6:20 PM


step by step
If abortions were made illegal again would there still be abortions?
Edited by jar, : fix subtitle

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:20 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:36 PM jar has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10085
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 264 of 403 (602538)
01-28-2011 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by slevesque
01-28-2011 6:12 PM


Re: Evidence?
I guess I can call you pro-abortion-legalization
'cause pro-legalization is not specific to what is to be legalized (unless, I guess, it could apply to someone who wants ot legalize everything)
Pro-abortion is not specific to what is being aborted. Pro-abortion could mean that we are for the abortion of countdowns prior to a space shuttle launch. Pro-abortion could mean we are for the stopping of everything. How far do you want to carry these silly semantics?
I suppose we could also ignore the nuances of other labels. I would assume that you are for the freedom of religion, so that would make you pro-muslim I would assume. You might be pro-gun, so you might be pro-killing. Need I go on?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:12 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:35 PM Taq has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 832 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 265 of 403 (602539)
01-28-2011 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by slevesque
01-28-2011 5:39 PM


Re: Evidence?
Opposed to the right of women to have the choice to terminate a pregnancy by induced abortion.

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 5:39 PM slevesque has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 266 of 403 (602540)
01-28-2011 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by slevesque
01-28-2011 6:18 PM


Re: Evidence?
slevesque writes:
When a creationist comes in with a wrong definition of the word ''evolution'', you correctly refer him to the dictionnary definition of the word. Why can't the same apply here ?
Because you're the one who's misusing the definition.
I'm anti-abortion. What part of that do you not understand?
How can I be anti-abortion and pro-abortion at the same time?

"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:18 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by bluescat48, posted 01-28-2011 6:41 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied
 Message 271 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:45 PM ringo has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4671 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 267 of 403 (602541)
01-28-2011 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 264 by Taq
01-28-2011 6:23 PM


Re: Evidence?
I'm not the one carrying silly semantics.
I use a word with the exact meaning it has in the dictionnary. I do this with every word I use in a sentence. You are the ones playign stupid semantics games, trying to add imaginary extra definitions to a word that doesn't.
When I use 'pro-abortion' in a sentence, I use it in the sense 'someone who is in favor of the legalization of abortion', no more, no less. I'm no using it in any other imaginary way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Taq, posted 01-28-2011 6:23 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by Taq, posted 01-28-2011 6:46 PM slevesque has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4671 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 268 of 403 (602542)
01-28-2011 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 263 by jar
01-28-2011 6:21 PM


Re: step by step
yes

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by jar, posted 01-28-2011 6:21 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by jar, posted 01-28-2011 7:08 PM slevesque has replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4220 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 269 of 403 (602543)
01-28-2011 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 266 by ringo
01-28-2011 6:32 PM


Re: Evidence?
I'd like to see someone who is pro-abortion? I'm pro-choice but detest abortion. I can also see that, at times, abortion is the lessor of 2 evils.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by ringo, posted 01-28-2011 6:32 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6412
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 270 of 403 (602544)
01-28-2011 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by slevesque
01-28-2011 5:46 PM


Re: Evidence?
slevesque writes:
As I said it's a nuance, pro-choice means someone who is for abortion to be legal and that the choice to abort or not is woman's choice.
In that case, I am pro-life, for I favor life being legal.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 5:46 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by slevesque, posted 01-28-2011 6:46 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024