CubeMelonClock
The Legendary Guest
Do you, or do you not, have something "far better" to present than anybody else?
you yourself asked the question.
I take this to mean you admit complete and total defeat on the issue (one who is not so stone cold as she once believed) because you are not able to provide the following:
1. a moral reasoning for abortion to be allowed
2. a sufficient argument against my original argument in the first place
3. a sufficient understanding of why laws exist
Dude? You're shirking the burden then trying to claim I'm the dishonest one. That might actually work on some people, but it's not going to work on me.
As far as what you did present, it has been refuted. You had absolutely nothing to say in response to any of it, other than to try and shift the debate into grounds you felt more comfortable defending.
Please demonstrate:
1. Why there must be a moral reasoning for abortion to be allowed, considering that it is already allowed.
2. Why I am required to assume your burden of proof for unfounded assertions, and
3. Why I should participate in an off-topic discussion on why laws exist
Otherwise there is no reason to continue to reply to you within this thread, because threadjacking is rude and I won't participate.