Not too far a stretch, either.

Yeah I do because democrats are the ones who hate religion and republicans are the ones who embrace it

What about the "disgusting" Muslims and the Jews who "shoot space lasers" everywhere? You don't embrace religion, you embrace Christianity. At least the Democratic Party lets more than Christians join the party.

More Christians are republicans because they read the bible and the bible is more to the right than the left

That's like saying only republicans are true Christians (which is of course, false).

No it isn't it's saying that Christians who read the bible and understand it are republican

You do know there are Christian democrats, right?

Yes I do what I'm saying is that the religion goes against nearly all democratic beliefs

Well, I have a religion and I'm still democratic. I do believe in gay rights (yes, I am straight), abortion is good for when rapes and other things like that happen, and other things that I'm just too lazy to remember.

What is your religion

Keeps blocking me from replying to your latest comment, I like to stay private on the internet to make sure nobody tries to track me down.

I haven't done anything to my comments it's doing the same for me though but anyways people won't track you down for religion

Anyways, I like to keep my personal info to myself.

Replying to your other comment because I can't reply from there: I keep my religion private from everyone, except from people I personally know and trust.

Why is that though

I'd like to keep it private.

Why is that because i'm Christian i'll be open about it that's why i'm a republican

Abortion is not good in the least. God.
I don't wanna rain on your parade, but you can't call yourself honest, kind, considerate, or a very good person in general if you condone the useless ending of human life. I know it makes me sound inconsiderate, but if there's one thing I really care about, it is life. Abortion is not okay, entirely because that child was predetermined to have a life, meaning it was already alive. If someone is raped, how is it right to blame the child? if anyone has to die, why the child? There's a rapist, after all. There's a reason that abortion can't be done naturally. Because it shouldn't be done at all. If you really, really don't want a kid after it's been born, you can give it to an orphanage and chance them at finding a loving family.

Agreed about an embryo being human, plus having a genetic code distinct from its mother thus means its a separate (identity-wise) individual.

However, referring to the Founding Fathers may not be the best argument, as initially they assigned those 'rights' solely to monied land owning adult men of Protestant British, German, and/or Scandinavian roots.

At least you understand
Also, the founding fathers knew that times would one day change, and prepared for that by making their documents flexible. They had the same biased beliefs as everyone at the time, but that does not mean they were not wise and intelligent. Definitions of "men" and "man" have, over time, changed to adjust to cultural acceptance and the like.

Yeah, good point.
And that's the beauty of it, and why it works now as it has then.

I'm not arguing on the sentience of a fetus. I'm arguing on the sentience of a zygote. It has no Central Nervous System. It cannot perceive its environment in any sense of the idea. An overwhelming majority of abortions are done before a zygote reaches the fetus stage. You're arguing about something that is irrelevant to the discussion of abortions. It's embarrassing.

And is a zygote a fetus? A zygote is a different story. Two are required to make a fetus and develop a central nervous system. I don't give a damn if it was aborted before it became a fetus. You killed it, it's dead. It could've been born, now it can't.

Guess when doctors declare you dead on life support?
When you have no brain activity.

No brain activity = Not alive. Just living tissue supported by a life support system in spite of the family saying they could come back, it's stupid rare.
Just like, how a zygote has no brain activity. It also survives on a life support system albeit a biological one. It's living tissue. It isn't alive. The first human brainwave doesn't start until 24-27 weeks.

#factsdontcareaboutyourfeelings #sorrynotsorry

It's stupid rare in tose scenarios. Therefore, you can't say "oh, it's definitely impossible for this to be alive", since, well, by that logic, it's not. If your father or your son, your flesh and blood, was to die without a will, and you didn't know what he wanted, would you be comfortable with donating them to science?

Damn, he used hashtags. How the hell am I ever going to recover from that?

1/ Let's work backwards, since it clearly fits your style of thought anyway.
>> Says the guy who believes in an invisible man who lives in the sky. (And you wanna talk about low blows? Smh. Minus respect.)

Everything you said here past number 2 was a cheap shot.
>> Just because it's a valid argument doesn't mean it was a cheap shot. Just tells me that you have a hard time answering it.

I have no doubt you're well-learned, and in that there's a degree of respect
>> Respect for recognizing that.
However, to address number 4, you would well know for that reason that if a god exists, there is a line between what that divine can do and what humans can do.
>> If "A" god exists. I am agnostic. But since to me, God is undefined, there is no telling what they can do.

The whole basis of Christian belief is that God has a capability to calculate far beyond what we can comprehend.
>> Such a concept is intrinsically logically fallacious. "We don't understand. Therefore, it's God's will because they understand that which can't be."

You have likely done your homework and know we object to the use of contraception in every form.
>> Raised Mormon, until 12, split off to Progressive Pentecostal... as far as Pentecostals go.

Sodom was slain for spilling his seed upon the ground, and we aim to uphold that standard of "don't do it" in every way possible (Since we can't truly prevent the natural cycle of menstruation, every way excluding that).
>> Two things: Christian circles state that they don't follow the old testament anymore when critics cite God's wrathfulness and the way of thinking found in there. As with Leviticus, we must sever the appendage that bears a tattoo, put all gays to death, not eat ham and chees for it is filthy, not to eat animals who bathe in their mother's milk. (Cheeseburgers) Etc. I could go on. But it seems that the bible is cherry picked by Christians to suit their narratives. One of the reasons I stopped believing in Mainstream Christianity. People call me agnostic, I call myself a Neo-Reform Christian.

2/ Again, to compare abortion to miscarriage is, scratch what I said before, a cheap shot. That's not even a technicality. That's just attempting to prey on those who aren't smart enough to understand there is a difference. We don't call them miscarriage clinics, because you don't go there to have a miscarriage. The term itself implies there was a natural mistake in the carriage of the infant. To have an abortion is to intentionally abort, to abandon ship.
>> Do you not know how female reproductive anatomy works? That's exactly what it is. I t isn't a "Oops, we made a mistake." The body is literally aborting it as it cannot support it. The difference between voluntary and non-voluntary abortion, is that your body does it naturally based upon its own homeostasis. Before man was able to have food provided to them and readily available, abortion happened naturally per the environment and what resources were available. However, we don't have that mitigating factor anymore. We trick our bodies into thinking there is food for everyone, but it our bodies don't understand the concept of money. Getting an abortion because you can't support a child is viable. I cite this because, if you look, many animals eat their young if they can't support them. They abort them AFTER birth. Since our bodies aren't smart enough to recognize technology, we have to have advances in medical practices help our body adapt to these changes. As it is? Milennials are having less children BECAUSE they can't afford to have them. A lot of contraception is being used, and you would have them not? So, Christianity wants to push its agenda onto others? So much for "We'Re BeInG pErSeCuTeD! Us PoOr ChRiSiTiAnS!" Now you can start to understand why. What, don't have sex? See religious persecution.

Again, to say it isn't alive definitively isn't a good idea in the first place. If meeting all seven criteria in order to be alive isn't enough for it to be, without a doubt, alive, then I'm certain whatever scientific loophole you managed to find paints some shade of grey.
>> According to NASA, these are the characteristics for being "Alive" (See third reply)

So that whole last bit about life needing life had no value or meaning whatsoever. It's really quite simple, and the fact you're dancing around to find these loopholes, these lapses in logic so you can say "oh, but actually, it turns out that..." is kind of telling as to what the truth of the matter is. If you kill a fetus, or remove a zygote as to pREVENT THE BIRTH OF A CHILD BY MEANS OF REMOVAL OF THE NECESSARY COMPONENTS, you are restricting the possibility of a birth that should have been the instant those components were provided. That may as well be murder, as much as keeping food or water from a prisoner.

Fun facts:
1) You can't murder someone that isn't "alive."
2) Abortion is a natural process and is seen repeated in nature. Humans have simply found a humane way to go about doing it.
3) So, you're preventing the birth of a child who is in an egg by wearing a condom? Or using spermicide? Seems to me you're avoiding that topic entirely.
4) Imagine God Letting millions of children die through another natural means of abortion every year called miscarriage. God's will, right?

Let's work backwards, since it clearly fits your style of thought anyway.

Everything you said here past number 2 was a cheap shot. I have no doubt you're well-learned, and in that there's a degree of respect. However, to address number 4, you would well know for that reason that if a god exists, there is a line between what that divine can do and what humans can do. The whole basis of Christian belief is that God has a capability to calculate far beyond what we can comprehend.

To address number 3- As aforementioned, cheap shot. You have likely done your homework and know we (in reference to Christian circles) object to the use of contraception in every form. Sodom was slain for spilling his seed upon the ground, and we aim to uphold that standard of "don't do it" in every way possible (Since we can't truly prevent the natural cycle of menstruation, every way excluding that).

Again, to compare abortion to miscarriage is, scratch what I said before, a cheap shot. That's not even a technicality. That's just attempting to prey on those who aren't smart enough to understand there is a difference. We don't call them miscarriage clinics, because you don't go there to have a miscarriage. The term itself implies there was a natural mistake in the carriage of the infant. To have an abortion is to intentionally abort, to abandon ship.

Again, to say it isn't alive definitively isn't a good idea in the first place. If meeting all seven criteria in order to be alive isn't enough for it to be, without a doubt, alive, then I'm certain whatever scientific loophole you managed to find paints some shade of grey. If I dry roast and eat a sunflower seed, it's dead. It was alive, at least as much as yeast prior to activation, and now it is without a doubt incapable of developing into a plant.

3/
Structure and Function: All organisms have external parts that they use to perform daily functions.
>> ZYGOTE FAILS. Different animals use their body parts in different ways to see, hear, grasp objects, protect themselves, move from place to place, and seek, find, and take in food, water and air. ZYGOTE FAILS Plants also have different parts (roots, stems,leaves, flowers, fruits) that help them survive and grow.

Organization for Matter and Energy Flow in Organisms: All animals need food in order to live and grow. They obtain their food from plants or from other animals. >>ZYGOTE FAILS Plants need water and light to live and grow.

Information Processing: Animals have body parts that capture and convey different kinds of information needed for growth and survival. >>ZYGOTE FAILS Animals respond to these inputs with behaviors that help them survive. Plants also respond to some external inputs.

Inheritance of Traits: Young animals are very much, but not exactly, like their parents. >>ZYGOTE FAILS Plants also are very much, but not exactly, like their parents.

Variation of Traits: Individuals of the same kind of plant or animal are recognizable as similar but can also vary in many ways. >>ZYGOTE FAILS

You see, a smattering of cells is not considered "Life." When you think of a Zygote as alive, what you're actually thinking of is "living tissue." And by the way, both males and females give off a full set of 23 chromosomes from their seed. When the gametes combine only a select amount of chromosomes are picked based on dominant or recessive genes. Therefore, a mother who has dominant genes while the father is recessive will impart more genes onto her potential child than the father will. It is conceivable that the zygote receives no genes from the father, although it's a statistical impossibility. That said, we *DO* have the power to clone people to be direct replicas of their parent as the parent has all 23 chromosomes. We've already cloned 9 sheep from different parts of cellular material such as mammary glands, embryonic and foetal cells,

The sheep that was cloned from adult cells in the mammary gland lived to be six years old, but died because of cancer caused by a contagious virus that causes cancer among sheep.

Final message incoming...

4/ You see, life holds sentimental significance to you, and that's fine with me.. Live and let live. But you guys have *GOT* to stop trying to force other people live by your lifestyle choices. It's wrong and infringes on the rights of self-determination.

Christians subject their children to mental abuse merely by being Christian, but that's your prerogative, you don't see anyone trying to ban Christianity for such unlawful practices. You cry out that you're being persecuted while doing extreme amounts of persecution yourselves. Smh. Smh.

"And is a zygote a fetus?
>> Nope. But a Zygote exists until 4-8 weeks which is the typical timeframe women get abortions.
A zygote is a different story.
>> So, you concede to that point then?
Two are required to make a fetus and develop a central nervous system.
>> No, one is required to make the fetus, the male has no part in the development of offspring. The male has nothing to do with the development of the CNS. Only the woman does. THe male literally just gives her his genetic code. That's it.

I don't give a damn if it was aborted before it became a fetus. You killed it, it's dead.
It could've been born, now it can't.
>> So, are women wasting their potential by not having sex by letting eggs die? Or Men killing potentially millions of children in five minutes by masturbation? Or Men and women killing children by using contraception? Your position is weak. Life doesn't begin at conception. Life began billions of years ago. You need life to create life. That life needs to already be alive to produce the genetic material to pass it on to someone else.

So that whole last bit about life needing life had no value or meaning whatsoever. It's really quite simple, and the fact you're dancing around to find these loopholes, these lapses in logic so you can say "oh, but actually, it turns out that..." is kind of telling as to what the truth of the matter is. If you kill a fetus, or remove a zygote as to pREVENT THE BIRTH OF A CHILD BY MEANS OF REMOVAL OF THE NECESSARY COMPONENTS, you are restricting the possibility of a birth that should have been the instant those components were provided. That may as well be murder, as much as keeping food or water from a prisoner.

Ah, forgot your second message:
"It's stupid rare in tose scenarios. Therefore, you can't say "oh, it's definitely impossible for this to be alive", since, well, by that logic, it's not. If your father or your son, your flesh and blood, was to die without a will, and you didn't know what he wanted, would you be comfortable with donating them to science?
>> Who said anything about donating anyone to science? Where did that come from? People die of brain death more often than you think. Doctors don't stop trying to revive you just because your heart stops beating, that's the whole point of cardio-pulmonary resuscitation. You're considered dead once your brain stops producing brain waves... WHICH HAPPENS EVERY DAY BECAUSE THAT IS HOW PEOPLE DIE.

MOST people talk about their wishes with loved ones regarding Life Support. It's more rare that they don't. And those who don't and have loved ones, usually have good intuition on what the wishes of the incapacitated party would be. I don't have a signed DNR code, but my wife knows that should I become a brain vegetable with no one home, to pull the plug.

Damn, he used hashtags. How the hell am I ever going to recover from that?"
>> Eh, you don't. That's about the best you could've done to save yourself there. Too bad it wasn't enough.

" It has just as many because it cannot be argued it is not alive. It is something like an animal- no real memory, but alive."

No, that argument cannot be debunked as it is living Human Tissue....

... but so is semen. You don't see Republicans calling for the criminalization for Masturbation, Blow Jobs, Hand Jobs and Anal Sex, do you?

A Zygote is human living tissue that does not have sentience; it cannot think. It has no central nervous system; it cannot feel. I do more inhumane damage to living creatures by eating steak, chicken, pork and elk. As that mammalian tissue is "alive" in the context in which I define it. I honestly would feel more remorse for the slaughterhouses we have for animals like the chicken. Completely inhumane conditions.

But... Zygotes... THey're just cells.

The thing is, by that logic, there is another dilemma. I cannot prove to someone that God is real with any bona fide, logical evidence. However, you cannot prove that animals and cells do not think. I do not necessarily believe they do- however, no evidence proves they do not. Therefore, there is no evidence proving that a fetus cannot think. If you can argue God does not exist because no evidence proves his existence, I can make the very same argument for the sentience of a fetus.

Also, the fetus carries all seven of the characteristics of life- the same seven characteristics necessary to classify those animals as alive. Cells, DNA, Response to Stimuli, Homeostasis, Metabolism, Growth and Development, and Reproduction, obviously in no specific order. Take note-
Cells- you have stressed that a fetus is Human Tissue- stem cells are even harvested from fetuses. Therefore, they carry cells.
DNA- Dioxyribonucleic acid is, rather obviously, present in the fetus. Therefore, it has DNA.
Response to Stimuli- A fetus will move on its own due to changes in its homeostasis. Therefore, it has the capability to Respond to Stimuli.
Homeostasis- A fetus at most points will require most aspects of human homeostasis. At all points it requires some. Therefore, a fetus requires homeostasis.
Metabolism- All fetuses and embryos must "eat" through the umbilical cord. Therefore, they have a metabolism.
Growth and Development- This one saves the fetus from not being classified as alive- since what was a fetus will both grow in size and change in appearance, it can grow and develop. All animals lack the ability to reproduce before a certain time period, so a fetus cannot be disqualified from being classified as alive from this alone.
Reproduction- When a fetus grows, it is (normally) capable of reproducing and generating fertile offspring. Therefore, it can reproduce.
If I count correctly, that's seven.
Funny.
It's alive.

Let me explain in simpler terms-
A human, often referred to as "man", is a member of the species homo sapien. A HUMAN FETUS is human, not only because it carries HUMAN CELLS, but because it will grow into A HUMAN. Every animal fetus is distinct from the fetus of another animal- therefore, there is no questioning if that fetus is that animal! When I see a human fetus, I don't see a cow fetus, do you? That fetus is a human, and therefore is a man, so is thereby granted EVERY RIGHT BESTOWED UPON MANKIND.
You must be just about as underdeveloped as that fetus if you can't understand that.

"Yeah, 'if'"
Ah, you got me. Whoopsie.
Oh, wait.
It does! "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..."
Therefore, in the founding document of the United States of America, the Founding Fathers explicitly expressed it to be true that a fetus has human rights- those three rights are the reasoning behind almost every law, so don't pretend it no longer applies- it does.

also, i do believe that this is, in fact, a convincing argument. My statements have almost always put a roadblock in the path of your previous statement, so it's foolish to believe the statement will pave through it just because you think it's true.

Of course it's human.
and it is alive,
otherwise abortion wouldn't be a thing, or someone needs a refund from their anatomy class in med school.

It doesn't [usually] have rights because those are created and assigned by law, and aren't granted by such to the unborn - unless someone who isn't the mother kills it, THEN it's 'murder'

What makes that true? A child at birth is human and stays that way to death, so what makes you believe another stage of life is not human?
If you agree that a fetus is alive, and it is undoubtedly human (human cells, again), that means it is a living human. A living human is thereby granted the right to live, and continue living.

The constitution doesn't need to. Logically, it applies if everything defining "man" is met.

For the same reasons as I have listed thus far, it should be.

It's not a matter of assumption- if it says that ALL MEN are created equal and granted those rights, and a fetus meets the requirements to be classified scientifically as man, then the rights apply to it. What's funny is i've said this at least three times- meaning that you can't seem to come up with new arguments regarding the removal of the right to life. Better get to brainstorming, then.

I believe fully they have rights. A black man is equal to me and equal to everyone else.
What I fail to understand is that, four months in the future, you answer the same question with the same answer. To answer another old question, you asked if I understand that if somebody has a human right, it cannot be taken.
A fetus carries human cells, and develops into a human- therefore it is human. I have made a pretty solid argument against GQP_Tear_Collector that a fetus is in fact alive.
A fundamental right granted to living humans, at least in this country, happens to be life.
Killing that organism deprives them of that right.

Please, go ahead and explain how it's a lie.
I'll wait.

What is this supposed to prove except that you're repeating yourself?

also, on not a political but a human note
why light mode

The founding fathers saw what every other living soul saw. Their actions were a product of their time- a handful were actually pseudo-abolitionists!

At the part where it says "[Man is] endowed with certain unalienable Rights". Fetus alive. Fetus human. Fetus count. Ooga.

Quite possible. I never explicitly said you don't- I can't know that. However, my statement was literally that no matter how you feel about it, it's true. I see how that came across, though.

How? Explain without repeating yourself.

They do- again, right at that part where it says that they are.
What was the 14th amendment again? Oh, right- the Citizenship and Naturalization one. Nothing to do with the three inalienable rights- different amendments have different termiologies because they mean different things.

It doesn't have more. It has just as many because it cannot be argued it is not alive. It is something like an animal- no real memory, but alive. It gets nutrients from its mother, but apart from that, it works alone. It needs support in order to, you know, help us survive the next five generations because there are some twisted people who think convenience is the only way to go.

Our nature is and should be to help the lesser. Your needs fall dead last- all others are paramount.

Well, I'm glad you're part of that particular group, but there are, in fact, many democrats who do believe that.

If you can say that because your interpretation is different, mine cannot be correct, I can make the same statement, and we're at a proverbial stalemate. This is not an opinionated matter in reality-- it is a matter of fact. A fetus is human and alive, which means that it is included in every single case in which rights pertain to an individual who meets the requirements- such as the quote I provided.

I answered the questions in order. I prefer to. How can killing another living human not be homicide (which is roughly Latin for "to kill human", or more specifically, "To kill homo sapien". Fetuses are certainly homo sapiens)? If the mother chooses to kill it, that is actually familicide ("To kill family"). That one cannot be accurately interpreted as untrue simply due to the fact the fetus carries the DNA of the mother in all cases, therefore it is family.

How would the strong helping the weak in every possible way not be an aspect of a perfect world? Like come on, have you ever watched a superhero movie?
note that last bit was in fact a joke
yes i can make jokes
thats what imgflip is for in the first place

Common sense and human decency. In anywhere near an ideal world, everyone puts each other before themselves. This world may not be near ideal, but there's no reason not to try and make it as close to that way as we can.

"Just because something has human DNA doesn't mean it is considered fully human. A strand of human hair has human DNA, but it is not afforded human rights."

A hair is not alive, nor will it become a human being. An embryo has human DNA, is alive, and undoubtedly grows to be a human. Therefore, as an egg and a tadpole are both stages in a frog's life, an embryo is a stage in a human life. Even beyond that, the simplest way to put it is that any animal at any point in its life is in fact that animal. Humans are no exception.

"Granted that right according to whom?"
*actual facepalm*
You missed that part in history class?
Or were you too busy playing the racism card everywhere?
Let me answer that question for you. Take notes this time.
The founding fathers did.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." - The Declaration of Independence of the United States of America
Regardless of whether or not you like it, you live here. In the land of the free, all men (meaning the human race, don't bother saying it) are granted the right to life. That's why murder is such a heinous crime.
So, riddle me this- if an embryo is human, alive, and therefore granted the rights applicable to anything that meets those requirements, why is killing it not murder?

The issue is, some people have different definitions of what is considered a "live human being." I don't consider a zygote a "live human being."

im going to scream
those weren't liberals. Those were not liberals. Don't throw any of the switched parties BS, the beliefs align, just not the geographical location (also, if you still think they switched, come up with one valid place where they switched).
There is no law against discrimination. Discrimination can't be stopped because people suck. The closest we got was Abraham Lincoln with the 13th,14th, and 15th amendments. He just so happened to be a republican.
Woodrow Wilson was a progressive, but that doesn't mean he can't make good choices.

Also, I have one good way of proving we didn't change. Conservatism is reading between the lines. Explore the founding document and then consider your choices, not free-for-all gung-ho idiocy.

I do understand. But it is her responsibility. It sounds disrespectful and inconsiderate, but that's her cross to bear. It's no excuse to end life because you don't want to go through pain.
Abortion is the failure to care for the life of that kid, or, as you say in order to disconnect the reality from your perceived opinion, the embryo.
An abortion is different from a miscarriage, in one key way. The child is killed inside of the mother in an abortion. In a miscarriage, it is involuntary and the child is expelled from the womb before it can survive outside.
Tell me how you aren't killing the kid. That embryo that was going to be a living person is now dead. What makes you think that isn't killing it?
And there's no sure way to make others believe in what I do, but to take the nihilistic stance here, thinking nothing is important and our decisions are futile, that the need for morals is nonexistent, that in this false existence, one life means nothing... that's just plain dark. I feel sorry for anyone who believes that.
Also note how you dodged the mass infanticide thing this time

However, would it not be best for those indivduals to be willing?

In this situation, yes, in fact, I am.

Liberalism is honestly the scourge of my life. I've found it easy to befriend many leftists and centrists. I love liberals too, it just that the policies and ideas get to me.

Pretty much. That's what humankind does. Feed from the strong to give to the weak.

That woman has lived a life and has no right to restrict anyone else from doing so.

I don't have time for a big reply, so I'll answer two. Infant mortality isn't a reason to kill off the "embryo" before it has a shot. Also, I understand the confusion, but murder is a heinous crime in the eyes of God. It's against the Commandments. However, Christianity acknowledges that humans make horrible mistakes. It enables the truly sorry to redeem themselves. And don't worry- murderers don't make it into heaven unless they repent with all of their mind, body, and soul.

Why do you believe the "rights" of a black man override the rights of a white man?

Sorry, went on a summer hiatus.
If I am physically capable of granting you that kidney, if there are no restrictions, and if it were to cause no complications on either end, then, in a perfect world, yes.

I had some long reply and then it got deleted, god

It is definitely useless. I'd say mass infanticide is useless.

You can argue the kid makes its own life, but I believe God has his plan for everyone. Including the kid you just killed.

How, then? Why would you kill the kid if it's not its fault? Obviously, there's faulty logic.

A miscarriage is not an abortion. Miscarriages are traumatizing and degrading. It's a failure to birth the child for some reason or another. An abortion is the failure to care. A doctor surgically peers inside you and kills the child.

As sad as that sounds, it is her responsibility. She may not care for the father, and in this case, probably loathes his existence, but she should give the child a shot. At the very least, we find a way to surrogate a live fetus.

Well, that's where we differ. One of us has some semblance of respect for human life, and the other doesn't.
I don't need to make it clear who's who.

Your entire political party has made it clear that they do. Go ahead and hop back on the bandwagon.

I can say the same thing. You put the word rights in quotes. Do you not believe human fetuses (which develop on their own with assistance from a controlled environment inside the mother, making them very much so alive) have rights?
And, yes, black people do have rights. I respect a black man as I respect a white man. I don't care what color you are for any reason, judgement and reasoning are equal. I made that statement to express the absurdity of what you're saying. And, the funny part is, you actually do believe that. Or at least your party does.

Looking at this argument, he's arguing over fetuses, I'd shift the argument to Zygotes..

It doesn't matter. Don't try and disconnect emotion from this living, human organism. It's not a leech, and stop acting like it is one. Every person on earth was born because their parents didn't miscarry or because their mother wasn't someone who wasn't going to give up, someone who would go the extra mile for this kid, regardless of whether or not they wanted it. That includes you and every other pro-choice person on the planet.

*was someone
finally made a really nice reply and there's that glaring error
god save me

or democratic beliefs go against all relgious beliefs.