Sure, except:
I'm talking about the one who replied, not the one who posted.

Sure, except:
I never said Centreri was letting emotion change his argument, I never even referred to his arguments. You assumed that, and therefore your post is even more useless than it was before.

I would prefer to say that you're killing it for its own relief. You ever hear about being tortured until you wish for death, or something else until you wish for death (coincidentally, suicide!)? Lets put you and 12 children in a 1-bedroom house with mold, all that in a gloomy, dangerous neighborhood, everything covered in graffiti, in an overpopulated school with 60 children per teacher (maybe not in America (maybe), but abortion isn't America-specific), absolutely no chance of getting beyond the rank of janitor in life, and probably prison or something like that.

Would you rather your mother never had you, or would you like to waste away in a prison cell for thirty years?

Also, the less you act like a baby the less people will make fun of your problems. Currently... yeah, even the great pacifist me wants to pick a fight.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Sep 22 2007, 4:57 am by Centreri.

Wrong.

It doesn't even matter if you weren't talking about his argument, because if you weren't, your post is senseless and useless. He can offer condolences on his terms. Your post has nothing to do with anything whatsoever if it isn't referring to his arguments, and if it is, it still has nothing to do with anything because emotional appeal didn't even change his argument. Either way you're wrong, but the latter was more sensible which is why I lent that to you.

Also, your assumption was that I talking to Redhead in the first place, which I obviously wasn't. That makes your argument nil.

Post has been edited 13 time(s), last time on Sep 22 2007, 4:56 am by PwnPirate.

Jesus Christ, this topic needs some serious moderation, in several areas, at least of some sort. Too bad we have no mods. Anyways...


I would rather live, obviously. Is that a serious arguement? "Would you rather get the chance to live and perhaps have a pretty shitty life, OR DIE." Any rational human would rather have the chance to live. This does not say anything about my stance on abortion, but I feel the arguement you are making for you side of it is pretty absurd. While you are alive, there can be things that are considered worse than death, when you are dead, nothing is worse than death. At least the first option gives you a chance. Just to state my opinion: Pro-choice, but I personally lean towards anti-abortion.


Umm, I know that Kellimus is being a little inconsiderate (understatement? ), but all your arguements here are still invalid. Just because you are subject to an extreme bias in your own opinion doesn't mean that the basis for that bias should change our minds in anyway. I'm searching for a good analogy here... I guess it's not necessary. Basically, just because one person misuses something and it causes harm to them, it in no way means that that thing is inherently wrong. And, if that isn't what you are saying, then there's no reason to tell us all about these things if you're looking for nothing but us to be nice to you about it.

The more important issue is the age at which conscious sentience develops.

There is nothing special or sacred about actually being human, a baby born without a brain is not sentient, and it's life should not be preserved because it was born to human beings. I do not know at what age sentience develops, but it is at that point where it becomes unethical to stop life, and at that point where the child must be allowed self-determination.

Yeah... didn't exactly come out right. Even when I used the most extreme case. Okay, would you rather ruin the lives of yourself and countless others or die? Still didn't come out right... As long as abortion is dealt with quickly, I'm pretty sure there's none of what you people call sentience (a silly word - it's a matter of degree), so killing an unborn child 5 months before it would be born isn't even as bad as killing a rat.

Would you ruin the lives of at least 2 people, or would you kill a rat?

Ooh, I'm pretty sure that came out right.

Good point, and not something I really bothered to touch on, but there's still one thing. Why exactly is it sentience that allows a child self-determination? How is the potential to be sentient any different from sentience when dealing with such young ages? If there is nothing sacred about being a human, then why is there something sacred about being sentient? I guess I just want some elaboration.


That was a much better arguement.

You aren't arguing that conclusion at all. It's only your statement that my post is useless. The rest doesn't argue that at all.

Irrelevant to the point of my post.

The real problem is you don't even understand the point in my post, as shown by what you're trying to argue and it's also repetitive and contradictory. I'm not referring to his arguments, but his posts, however, that doesn't make m post useless. It makes your reply useless. You shouldn't even be replying to it in the first place.

No you're wrong, for the reasons above.

It makes my reply to your reply nil (even though your wording was really bad and ambiguous and I made the most reasonable inference), but that original reply of yours is nil in the first place, as explained in this post:

In other words you're wrong originally replying with
both in the way I first assumed it in my original reply, and even more so when you're referring to Centreri, because then you're just making wrong assumptions about my original post.

Post has been edited 4 time(s), last time on Sep 22 2007, 6:22 pm by devilesk.

I suppose it is the difference between acting on instinct, and acting on thought, it is surely an arbitrary distinction, but if I were to call a blastocyst a human being with rights and privileges, I would have to give those same rights to all life on this world more complex than volvox algae, lest I call myself a hypocrite.

I have a need for a better understanding of developmental cognitive science, before I can make a judgment on abortion.

Ok, that says a lot, and satisfies my need for your elaboration. As for the latter of your statement, I guess I do too. If you ever do learn more about it, let me know.

You aren't doing exactly what you want me to do. What is your reasoning for replying to his post and not his argument? You haven't mentioned anything about it at all. Since you had given me absolutely nothing to argue why your post was useful, I took the most obvious reason: If it isn't referring to his arguments, it's referring to his opinions, which have nothing to do with the argument.
Your post is useless. So if I reply saying that it's useless, then it makes my post useless and your post useful? No. Your post is still useless.
It wasn't ambiguous at all, how could I even be talking about the poster if I quoted your post which was referring to Centreri?. That wasn't any more of a reasonable inference than mine about you talking about his argument and not his opinion.
Wrong, for the reasons above.

Sad, it's a one line post and you can't even understand it.

Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's useless.

My post was directed towards Centreri but it also had a lot to do with Redhead. As I've explained before, your post would have made a lot more sense if it was in fact about Redhead. And no, your post is ambiguous because of your use of personal pronouns without first making any statement about who it is. At least with my post it's clear when I use the word "his" it's referring to Redhead. With your post it could have easily been either one of them.

Wrong, for the reasons above.

You're just hiding behind a screen. You still haven't said any actual information, so you're still wrong.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Sep 23 2007, 7:58 pm by PwnPirate.

I see you've started to describe yourself in the second person.

Lol owned. Btw, PwnPirate, you are wrong. You guys should really take these things to the pm box. (but at that point I don't think you guys would even bother ) Although it can be amusing to read from time to time, it is a bit much when you two do this in every single topic you converse in.

I agree

You apparantly can't comprehend what I am talking about. Here is the scope of things if you can't understand.
-Centreri consoled someone for the loss of their mother
-You told Centreri not to fall for emotional appeal.
-I respond saying his argument wasn't changed by emotional appeal anyways
-You thought I was talking about redhead
-I wasn't
-You said you weren't referring to his argument and said my post was useless
-I said if you weren't referring to his argument, and you were instead referring to his opinion, it wouldn't be on topic anyways so I said your post was useless.
-You said I wasn't providing proof for why your post was useless
-I then clarified that personal opinion had nothing to do with the topic
-You then said I wasn't getting the right information from your message
-I asked for the supposed right information
-You said absolutely nothing, except a few sentences about why you thought I was talking about redhead
-I then prompted for the information again
-You still said absolutely nothing.

So if you can't get it the first two times, I'll ask you a third time:
What excuse do you have?
I don't know why I should respect your advice when you jump in the fray yourself and partake in a discussion that you are telling us to stop. But if you really want to know I did take the last topic to PM, then devilesk basically just said I was an idiot and blocked me without even attempting to tell me he didn't want to argue. I'll admit I'm a bit stubborn in arguments, but I never delve into insult without provocation. If he's going to be rude, I have no problem defending myself.

Post has been edited 8 time(s), last time on Sep 24 2007, 12:19 am by PwnPirate.

That was part of the point, in order to say anything I had to be contradictory. The whole is just ridiculous, I could say anything without being lulz for contradiction on my own part.


I know, because I told/asked (I can't remember how I phrased) you guys to do it when I had power in this forum for a couple days. Apparently it effectively ended the relatively pointless conversation, what a shocker. Other than that, I have nothing to say.

I wasn't talking about the posts in the topic, I was talking about our pms, so unless you can read our private mail, you don't know what I mean.