The only thing that was irritating me was the derailment of the thread into another fetus discussion. Oh, and your attempt to make us follow your argument into absurdity. We're not all studying philosophy in college, you know.
They're not my arguments, and the absurdity is inherent. Like people, stupid arguments always end up looking stupid if you ask them difficult questions. And I never criticise anyone for not studying philosophy, or point it out, or raise the issue in debates. I find it odd that some people here seem to hold it against me.
We have our very own Christian conservative willing to answer questions (sometimes) and I think trying to understand why he thinks and believes the things he does is interesting. There are so many people in our society who have the same views. I agree that they are sometimes morally inconsistent. For instance, they act like pat downs at the airport are a huge unconstitutional invasion of privacy, but they don't have a problem with forcing a woman to have her vagina probed needlessly in order to obtain an abortion. It's this huge disconnect that I'd like Wardogg to help us understand, if he can.
Okay, but the thing is, this isn't exactly a fresh topic either. There have been a lot more 'Wardogg vs The World' threads than there have been abortion threads, and in my experience
they always end the same way - with Wardogg either dodging the argument or making absurd analogies/points that nobody wants/is able to call him on. I like Wardogg, but debates with him don't go anywhere, because his starting assumption is unshakable: namely that his cultural/religious views are broadly correct.
However, when people make poor arguments against his position, I occasionally step in, because whatever I may think about his views, he is for the most part outnumbered here. I can't argue
with Wardogg, but I can argue against some of the rather poor objections that are raised.