It is life, but a small clump of cells is not equal to a full-grown adult. That's where you start losing the argument, and I've had such an argument with the pro-abort types. When it reaches closer to the point of viability, hence the stopping of a beating heart, than the argument carries weight.
"You seem to think it’s always about the parents. About holding them responsible. If they got pregnant voluntarily, then the have a duty to stick with it, if they didn’t, then they don’t."
The subject of this thread/discussion is the victim of the rape.
"I’m telling you that all fine and good, but the reason I oppose abortion is not because I want people to be responsible, it’s because I don’t want babies to be murdered."
Nobody except evil people militantly exploiting the cause and abortionist butchers like Killer Tiller want that, but the question remains, what length will you go to to ensure it doesn't happen, even in the case of rape victims ?
"And your analogy with the the self defense argument is downright laughable."
Nonsense. Laughable was the ludicrous argument about the location of the rape, which I didn't respond to because of its absurdity.
"The baby is not harming the woman. The baby is not perpetrating an attack on the woman, self defense only applies to situation where a person is being attacked. Harming some innocent third party is not self defense."
A rape victim ? That's awfully presumptive on your part. I already told you I know someone who was very close to me who came within an inch of being raped by her own father. If she had been impregnated and couldn't terminate at once, she'd have killed herself. The rapist's "deposit" can be extraordinarily psychologically harmful to women. You want to make the argument that terminating is, too, you can, but don't say it doesn't cut both ways. When you've been raped, and it doesn't bother you carrying the produce of it to term, then you can claim otherwise, but even then, you'd only be speaking to yourself. I only know I would want it out of me immediately. To even be reminded of that, to wake up every day knowing what's in me would probably make me want to harm myself in order to get it out. You're not taking that into account, at all.
"I don’t like the language because it’s the language of the pro-aborts. You’re using the exactly same defense that they use to defend all the other abortions. What if they had sex voluntarily, and she got pregnant, but a week later he raper her."
That's not a product of rape. And I'm talking about termination within a day of the act, not weeks nor months later, when the horse is out of the proverbial barn. When it's viable, it's murder.
"You call yourself a pro-lifer, but you fail the first rule of being one, that of recognizing that the baby having an unalienable right to life. Then abortion is fine under all kinds of circumstances, why leave it only at rape, why not make it available for whatever reason. But if the baby does have that right, then all the other stuff don’t matter."
Then by your definition, a large majority of pro-lifers aren't, because they cannot defend the wrongness of state coercion against a crime victim, which you continuously ignore. So you can call yourself 100% pro-life, but you're also, by that definition, fully approving of fascist-statist, big government tactics, to ensure female crime victims have ZERO rights, all to ensure they will and MUST carry the genetic material of a criminal to full term.
"So tell me, does that baby have the unalienable right to life, or not?"
A viable fetus under ALL circumstances, yes. But a clump of cells trumping the rights of a victim of rape ? No. You want to talk her out of termination ? Go ahead. But you cannot reduce a victim's right to nothing, to being a second-class citizen, at the mercy of the state, a totalitarian state that doesn't give a damn about their person beyond it being a vehicle to grow a baby without considering the harm it could cause it. This is a victim's rights issue, too, and you won't recognize that. But I've made my case, you won't change my position here, and I'm sorry you won't comprehend why I take it, and why you won't see that my admonishing your stridence here is going to cost the movement substantially, because you insist on putting cells before the victim. A clump of cells is not worth more than me, and is not worth more than you, and is certainly not equal to. As it develops to viability, its worth and value increase to the level of full-blown humanity, otherwise it is merely a work in progress, that may or may not become fully human, if it survives to that point. Do I hope they do ? Yes. Do I wish nobody would abort, including rape/incest victims ? Yes. Just because I wish to preserve the right of a victim doesn't mean I militantly tell them to terminate each and every pregnancy, only that I have no right to tell a victim what they MUST do by force of the state. Period.
Ahh, the old “viability” canard that the pro-aborts love to bring up.
Really, you’ve hit them all tonight, from “not viable” , to “clump to cells”, to “father’s sperm”, to “stop imposing your morality on me” to “keep your fascist laws off my body”, you sure you’re not getting this off the NOW website?
Viability is one of the most flawed arguments.
A fetus is 100% viable, when left alone. A fetus is only “not viable” when it is forcibly removed from the environment it is designed to be in that stage of its human existence. Which makes it no different from you or me, if I took you out of the environment that you’re meant to be viable in at your current stage of existence, which is normal atmosphere. And forcibly stuffed you in a vat filled with liquid, which is what the fetus’ environment is like, you’d drown and die. Does that mean you’re “not viable”? And therefore you’re not really a person entitled to full human rights because once removed from the current environment and put into another you’re not capable of surviving?
See how absurd that is?