Having it both ways

"First of off, before I begin, Pro-lifers are also arguing against the Chinese draconian law." Let me first thank you for debating me. Secondly, let me say that there is generally no dispute among pro-life or pro-choice camps that what is going on in China is abysmal. If ever they were united on an issue, this might be one of them. Chinese law is often construed in the West as repressive and suppressive. However, having said that, I need to point out that isn't the focal point, nor is part of the debate whatsoever. The issue we are dealing with is a philosophical/moral question. The purpose of this thread is to pit pro-choice against feminism, two very important causes within mainstream America. I see no way to logically reconcile the two without fundamentally jeopardizing either position. If you feel otherwise, I certainly open the floor to you. "1. My opponent has provided no proof as to if pro-choicers are really agreeing with this statement." Immaterial. Why would I need to provide proof when it is very evidently framed as a moral question to the one who chose to debate me on this topic? I made it clear from the original post that my source came from a radio program that I stumbled upon. Requesting me to track down the radio station to corroborate their sources should not be a burden of mine since the debate is not over the veracity of the claim, but rather the philosophical/moral implications. Nevertheless, if you are simply asking if such a thing actually takes place in China, I will oblige your request. http://www.msnbc.msn.com... http://www.nrlc.org... http://www.gendercide.org... "which pro-choicers is he talking about?" The ones on the radio program and the ones on a forum that I frequent who,in vain, attempted to debate the topic. "Pro-choice ranges just as Pro-life does. There are Pro-lifers that agree a woman can have an abortion if the child birth will result in her death or if she is raped. There are also Pro-choicers that believe abortion is only right during first trimester. Then there are even those that believe a baby can be aborted during the final trimester. He must specify as it is extremely relevant to the situation." This is irrelevant since I framed my question towards the challenger, which, in this case would be you. I'm not concerned with how Pro-Choice activists distinguish themselves from one another. I'm only concerned with the opinions of my antagonists. I want to know how my challenger can reconcile the two while remaining cogent and consistent with their beliefs. I suspect this is a distraction to get away from the heart of the issue. "1. The babies that were being aborted weren't the only baby girls in China that were removed. They would even inject baby girls that were born well and healthy with poisons, leave some of them out in the woods, or rid them in many inhumane ways. This is smothering the name of Pro-Choicers, and of course they would be speaking out against this." But that isn't what we are discussing. The rest of your post simply devolves further in to off topic strawmen and non-sequiturs. The argument is transparently specific to abortion. But lets try this another way. I will ask a straight-up question, and you can answer it. Feel free to explain your rationale, but at the least, answer it. If, for whatever reason, it is more complicated than a simple yes or no answer, then by all means feel free to clarify your position. For instance, you bring up that some pro-choicers feel it is morally wrong to abort after the first, second, or third trimester. If one of these presents a moral dilemma for you, personally, I would like to know about it. What I don't want to know is what other people think. I want to know what you think. So with that, I ask: Is it wrong to abort more females than males?