I found this on my Facebook, but unfortunately I cannot comment on it, so instead, I shall leave the comment I would have made here. Is that all right with you guys?
An eagle is an animal. An animal has no ability to consent over its own body,because animals do not have that ability. PLUS, the egg doesn’t even count as part of its body, since the egg was removed from the eagle’s body and put into a nest.The bald eagle was taken off the endangered species list as early as 2007, so to keep the species off of it, perhaps not damaging the egg would help, yes?
Most abortions are performed before the zygote can be determined to have a sex. Don’t use “he” or “she” to sucker-punch people into your position.
“Want to force taxpayers to pay for [it] to be killed.”
You know, there’s things tax money goes toward that I don’t like either. The war in Iraq, for example. The war is costing about $720 million a day. Planned Parenthood spends about 3% of its services on abortion. I haven’t found how much money is funded towards abortions, but I’m assuming it’s less than $720 million A YEAR.
Oh yes, and “God’s word.” You know what the Bible talks about a lot more than abortion? Judging people!
“There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?” (James 4:12)
“And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, ‘Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.’” (John 8:7)
And there’s many, many, MANY more. I just chose these two as the best. By saying people who get an abortion are “messed up”, that is being judgmental. (By the way, the Facebook friend I got this from, once responded to my claim that making abortion illegal would make women die from getting botched abortions: “Good, they deserve to die.” Random factoid that may be unfairly swaying towards my argument, but just thought I’d throw that out there.)
Oh, but this is from a site about how all liberals are clueless. Let’s take a look at some others, shall we?
I think people have a right to be justifiably upset about a possible President who keeps his money in secret bank accounts in other countries to avoid his civic duty of paying taxes.
I’ve seen conservatives do the exact same with President Obama’s bad record and Willard Mitt Romney’s good record. Thus, this is not “Liberal Logic” as it is “People Logic.”
Again, I’ve seen both liberals AND conservatives do this, so it’s “People Logic.”
In fact, the entire LiberalLogic101.com site is full of name-calling diatribes.
And the overall important thing? How exactly is it “fair” and “just” to put an unborn zygote over a full-grown woman? Quit using God and the Bible, seeing as they’re BOTH irrelevant to American politics, considering that since the United States is a melting pot, that means there are many different people of different religions and beliefs.
Hm…clearly this wouldn’t have fit in a Facebook comment, but at least I got to say all of this SOMEWHERE, even if it is preaching to the choir.
4 Comments
“You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into in the first place.”
A big Hmm.
I don’t really mind what people say, so long as they are consistent. That is true of Liberals and of others,
I can’t say I am imprssed with the post though.
“An eagle is an animal. An animal has no ability to consent over its own body,because animals do not have that ability.”
Fair enough. but how is that relevant to a foetus? The point is not that the mother has the ability to give consent or not; the point is that the egg or foetus is not capable of approving or stopping its destruction. In that sense an egg is in the same position as a foetus.
“The bald eagle was taken off the endangered species list as early as 2007, so to keep the species off of it, perhaps not damaging the egg would help, yes?”
This I really don’t understand. Being taken off the endangered list would mean that protecting the egg is no longer needed. No? If destroying an egg endangered the species, then the eagle would still be on the list, wouldn’t it?
“Most abortions are performed before the zygote can be determined to have a sex. Don’t use “he” or “she” to sucker-punch people into your position.”
Well, what term should be used? “It”? That doesn’t sound very nice. Using he or she is standard practice – in the way that a ship is a “she” and most/many manuals these days use the terms interchageably. To be, err, ‘inclusive’, I guess.
I won’t comment on the biblical arguments, since I’m of the Darwinian tendency.
“It” is fine. It’s a ZYGOTE, as the original poster stated, most abortions are performed before sex can be determined. You know what doesn’t sound very nice to me? People who think they can control what happens to a woman’s body against her will, and use loaded language to try and influence others into believing it’s acceptable.
Luckily there is a “dislike” feature for anti-choicers who get onto my Facebook page, it’s called “Remove from friends”
(I mean, if that happened. I never saw anyone post that kind of stuff on mine, even a couple of conservatives I’m friends with on there seem to be more concerned with other things.)
Reading this post I couldn’t understand why you wouldn’t delete them either. It doesn’t seem like someone who thinks women who make different life choices should be killed wouldn’t be a close friend of yours. And yes, “it” is the right word because thats what it is! A zygote! We should use words that are accurate. I don’t know why I should be more “nice” to something that doesn’t really exist yet as a human being does.