Debate: Abortion the defining Moral issue of our day
Side: Abortion is right

I said there is good and evil and mostly gray, don't mince my words. Rape is one of the few things that is unconditionally evil. But even rape has neutrality in it. Let's say you rape someone as evil as Hitler, a murderer of innocent people. Is that evil? No. Fighting evil with evil is not evil, it is neutral. There is only one truth, yes, but my point is that you don't know what that one truth is. Human perception is the only thing we can run on because it is the only way we can see things. You can't, I can't. Therefore, you cannot make assumptions of what the truth is by putting in place of it your opinions. My abortion belief is not opinionated in any way, and that's what separates me from you.It's a radical thing to say abortion is wrong under any circumstance because the idea that it is takes away freedom from certain people. Is taking away freedom right when people don't all share you ideas? No. And yes, there is a gray area in pedophilia you ding-dong. Have you no imagination? Here's a scenario: You are an adult, and you make great friends with a teenager; one day, you fall in love with him/her and they feel mutually back despite you being much older then them. Is that love wrong? Just because there is an age gap? Not necessarily. Not all pedophiles are evil perverts just because you think they are. What Hitler did WAS wrong, did I dispute that it wasn't? But in fact, it was gray in some areas. Why? Because he saved Germany. He did more evil then good, but in the end, he still was some gray despite being a lot of evil.The 9/11 bombers were wrong to, but you have to realize, they were brought up in a third world country where they had nothing, where they starved to death whilst people like American's were getting hundreds of divorces every day. Yes, they killed people, but they suffered and died for their actions. Even in those acts, there was balance, despite being mostly evil.It's meant to be contradictory. I don't believe in either radical, I trust in the balance between the two which I explained. Why are you arguing as if I believe in both of them at the same time? I'm not pro-choice, I'm just on this side of the debate. The fact is that a fetus isn't human at a certain stage and completely human after a certain point.Just because we judge doesn't mean we know. I know facts when I speak of my abortion ideas, but I do not know facts when I make opinions of you.You're right, you don't need anyone to tell you right from wrong, but neither do I, because I don't have opinions about this, I know facts about this. That's what I base my morality on. I don't care what the dictionary says. Use your own definition for a human being. What separates humans from most animals is that we have a self-aware consciousness, a soul. Some animals also do, but not all, but that doesn't mean we aren't still defined by our personality, consciousness, and soul.Just because something is alive doesn't mean it's alive like a human. A mushroom is alive. Is is it wrong to step on a mushroom? No, it has no consciousness. A severed chicken leg has living cells (for a time after being severed), is it wrong to cook and eat it? No. It has no consciousness. What about a human finger? Is it by itself human because it has living cells (for a time)? NO. To say it is human for that reason is illogical idiocy.Yes, humanity is measured by consciousness. You think the mentally retarded have no consciousness? They do. They feel and think and have a soul. People in commas are sleeping. For a long time. They think and feel and have a soul. Vegetable people are not human. They brains are dead. They feel nothing, think nothing, and have no soul. Only their organs are alive and their brains have no function except to keep their life processes going. They are vegetables. Are vegetables people? No. The person they were died with their brains. So yes, vegetable people are soulless piece of meat.I know that a soul inhabits a body when something has a consciousness. We have machines to tell this. What you do not have is a machine that can show that a soul inhabits a body before something has a consciousness. Also, yes, I am God. I am a Pantheist. But that has nothing to do with this debate.If humanists mention souls, then apparently I'm not a humanist. Duh.No, I am not a butcher, but anyone can be a butcher if they want. The point is that masses of meat aren't human, dummy. Just because it's made of human cells doesn't make it human.Just because something is unconscious doesn't mean it doesn't have a consciousness. So no, I am not being unscientific at all, nor grotesque and insane. You're insane for mincing my words together and taking everything I say in a manner that it does not mean.Abortion to purify races isn't right if that's the intent. But the act of the abortion at a stage before consciousness isn't wrong, the intent is wrong. Stem cell research is very beneficial for medical research. Though, killing a conscious fetus and selling it's body parts is immoral and disgusting. That intent is wrong in some cases, but only the intent, not if the act of the abortion is before the fetus is conscious. Once again, the intent is wrong, but the act of aborting before the fetus is conscious isn't.I'm all over on what? Abortion is right when the fetus isn't a human. Once it's human, it's wrong. What's complicated about that? I know when a fetus is human, I can prove it. You can't prove that fetus is human before it has a consciousness. Yes, I do, you do not need to provide a link.No, I did not say that, I gave it as an example of one of the extreme points. I've already said 3 or 4 times that I do not agree with either extreme point, I'm just on this side out of coincidence, and now because you're zealously pro-life.No, my comments are morally logical and make plenty of sense. What you thought my comments said by mincing the words together inside your mind is what makes no sense. What is wrong with you?