What the Babies Would Say

[habsheaven]

He was at least MILES ahead of you, and he was on his first try. What's your excuse.

He said EXACTLY what I was saying. The difference being you took his words at face value and had to distort mine because of who was saying it.

[Wickabee]

He said EXACTLY what I was saying. The difference being you took his words at face value and had to distort mine because of who was saying it.

He also came into this after you had already spewed a bunch of crap and diverted attention to semantics in an attempt to distract from the point. So his view was tainted by you hypocritical and deliberately obtuse posts.

[Wickabee]

First bold

The point I was making was that the harm caused by the man aborting the situation, and the harm caused by the woman aborting the situation are not comparable. Nowhere did I say or imply it is okay for a man to get away with no responsibilty. If you think I did. Find it, post it!

Second bold

I am pro-choice. That has been well established on these boards for some time now. And again I refer you to post #84. I did address the only way I know how to fix the inequality.

First. You didn't say it outright, but you've been arguing in favour of it this entire time. Get off the semantics. It's pointless.
You're pro choice, yes. But why?

[Wickabee]

Just so this doesn't get lost in the shuffle as someone wants because it voes against everything he's said about me.

Wow. Another one.

Let me try this. Ahem

I AM NOT SAYING BABIES SHOULD DIE FOR EQUALITY
I AM SAYING THEY DO
I AM NOT SAYING THAT IT IS RIGHT
I AM SAYING THAT IT IS
I AM NOT ADVOCATING FOR ABORTION
I AM SAYING BY SOLVING THE PROBLEM OF ABORTION YOU CREATE A PROBLEM OF INEQUALITY
I AM SAYING THAT THE CREATED PROBLEM IS NOT OKAY BECAUSE IT IS A LESSER PROBLEM
I AM TRYING TO MAKE YOU GUYS THINK AHEAD A LITTLE

But you guys are so stuck in trenches you can't even see that. You see everything in terms of pro or anti and you don't look ahead. You don't want to because it means this one thing won't solve all problems.

[boba]

He also came into this after you had already spewed a bunch of crap and diverted attention to semantics in an attempt to distract from the point. So his view was tainted by you hypocritical and deliberately obtuse posts.

I can't believe you are accusing someone else of using samantics to divert away from the point. When you point your finger at someone 4 fingers are pointing right back at you. I can't remember an argument you have had on here
that you haven't used samantics.

[Wickabee]

I can't believe you are accusing someone else of using samantics to divert away from the point. When you point your finger at someone 4 fingers are pointing right back at you. I can't remember an argument you have had on here
that you haven't used samantics.

Thanks for that. I'm trying to get this off pointless semantics and back to some semblance of a point.

The really funny part is I said "relatively minor" simply to shorten it. Any differing meaning found was by him and not intended by me. He felt the need to devolve this into a semantics argument for several pages based on his own misunderstanding.

[habsheaven]

He also came into this after you had already spewed a bunch of crap and diverted attention to semantics in an attempt to distract from the point. So his view was tainted by you hypocritical and deliberately obtuse posts.

Here is my first post (#81 I think) related to your POV.

There is a MAJOR difference between a man shirking his responsibilities and a woman shirking hers. For both the man and the woman, they can choose adoption to relieve themselves of the responsibilty of a child. If a man chooses to walk away, no one is harmed. For the woman, the only other way of ridding herself of the responsibility is to have an abortion. In the mind of an anti-abortionist, she is committing murder. To suggest that this is okay because she has to be equal to her male counterpart is ludicrous.

Life is unfair in many ways that simply cannot be solved. I won't bother to list them all.

Please point out the semantics. Before you do though you might want to read your post reponding to it.

[Wickabee]

Here is my first post (#81 I think) related to your POV.

There is a MAJOR difference between a man shirking his responsibilities and a woman shirking hers. For both the man and the woman, they can choose adoption to relieve themselves of the responsibilty of a child. If a man chooses to walk away, no one is harmed. For the woman, the only other way of ridding herself of the responsibility is to have an abortion. In the mind of an anti-abortionist, she is committing murder. To suggest that this is okay because she has to be equal to her male counterpart is ludicrous.

Life is unfair in many ways that simply cannot be solved. I won't bother to list them all.

Please point out the semantics. Before you do though you might want to read your post reponding to it.

The semantics is in the three pages of you getting mad that I shortened it to "relatively minor" because YOU took it to mean something else.

[habsheaven]

Thanks for that. I'm trying to get this off pointless semantics and back to some semblance of a point.

The really funny part is I said "relatively minor" simply to shorten it. Any differing meaning found was by him and not intended by me. He felt the need to devolve this into a semantics argument for several pages based on his own misunderstanding.

You didn't simply shorten it. You changed it from being a comparison, to being an excuse to force women to term. Then called me a misogynist for it.

[habsheaven]

The semantics is in the three pages of you getting mad that I shortened it to "relatively minor" because YOU took it to mean something else.

Keeping digging the hole. You are convincing no one.