Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy
Oh yeah, here's where I was going with this ( ):
OK, parents should be allowed to let their (born) children die of treatable sickness (hope I'm not reading too much into your answer there, since I didn't mention treatment, but implied it), but they shouldn't be allowed to kill their unborn children. Where do you draw the line?
Land of the free, huh?
|
That's pretty much the definition of freedom man. People took their families to homestead in far away places and froze to death in the winters... or starved to death... or died of sicknesses. People struck out west in search of gold and died there.
People have convictions and beliefs that they stand by. Some people die standing for what they believe in and it used to be that we were free to do that.
But someone dying from a disease, even a treatable one, is not apples to apples with abortion.
No one is allowed to pour a liquid on their child that will burn then to death and kill them. No one is allowed to take a weapon and carve their kid to pieces. THESE THINGS are apples to apples with abortion and none of these things are allowed and nor should they be.
Timmy... I think sometimes you've postulated convoluted arguments for fun for so long that you've become convoluted in your own thinking. But, who knows, maybe you're still having fun. Let's hope so.