Having it both ways

My opponent states: "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." And yet states...: 1. If a fetus is not considered a human being by the dictates of a society gone mad, how on earth can they can they reconcile that which is irreconcilable? (Society? I thought you wanted my opinion.) 2. If you don't consider a FETUS to be a human, or a "baby," then its gender is totally irrelevant and is, at most, extraneous information to an abortionist. (I have yet to state my beliefs on what a fetus is or isn't, strawman.) 3. With all due respect, I am simply trying to debate the premise that I set up. Anything less is hijacking a thread and distorting it to suit an agenda because you can't really deal with the actual moral of the debate. In a way I am sympathetic to your plight, as there is no rational way to defend an indefensible position. (Strawman + moves away from wanting my opinion). 4. The same people telling us that the West intrudes and tramples upon other cultures ironically have no problem intruding or trampling them when it suits their own agenda. (My opinion, remember?) 5. I thought to a pro-choice advocate, that was a bonus. Again, the same people that generally warn of impending overpopulation are also the same people who support abortion. And in China, a country with billions upon billions of people, and a nation still with millions starving, I thought this is considered a good thing to pro-abortionist. (Again, my opinion, not the world's. We must keep to your askings!) 6. And remember: China has a one-child policy, right? But many women in that culture actually themselves prefer to have male children just as much as their husbands do. Are you saying that you would be willing to take away their choice? I only ask because that seems completely counter to what pro-choice is supposed to mean -- its the woman's choice no matter what. (Again, remember, my opinion... Also, this clashes with my opinion that a balance is needed, but can still co-exist with pro-choice. I don't believe in extremes.) 7. Why? Men can't farm? (Never said men can't farm - only that woman are a major driving force in an ethnic community where some traditions in work are only female based.) 8. All in all I thought your reasons for why its "wrong" were trite, banal, and typical. And you no further explained the moral question. Instead you used a sleight of hand to smuggle in utilitarian and pragmatic reasons masquerading as genuine concern and a genuine moral. (First off, who said I was genuinely concerned? Secondly, it is what you asked for. How "trite, banal, and typical" it is doesn't matter as long as it's cogent and consistent with my beliefs, correct? Well...that it is. And, sir, I wouldn't be talking about slight of hands. If I'm not genuinely concerned, then I can be as utilitarian as I please. Again, my opinion. Can we all say the word of the debate, it seems, "strawman" together?) 9. If a fetus is not a human, then there is neither a baby boy, nor a baby girl gestating in a womb. Instead there is only an amorphous blob that is beginning to form its sex organs, almost as incidentally, not to mention as insignificantly (to an pro-abortionist) as a chicken. (Huge Strawman. Again, I NEVER stated if I thought the fetus was a "human" or not. Maybe I'm a sadistic person who likes to kill human beings and I find no problem in it? Who knows. The point is, I never said. He put words in my mouth. Strawman.) My opponent believes that I must meet his morals in order to be correct. No, I don't. I have met my morals cogently and consistently. This is what he asked for, I have fulfilled this, I need not do anymore. I can not be provoked by him saying he doesn't care about the opinions of others after my first round, and then coming back after and saying how my beliefs don't mesh with standards. Remember his question. That was his mistake. And as for these: "6. You risk sky ponies." I have no idea what this means... Can elaborate for me, please? "7. You usher in an era of purple grass." I also am not familiar with this term. Can please expound for me? (Read the comment box.) Thank you for the debate, also, Paradigm Lost. Hopefully we'll do this again. Regards, Vi Veri