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

No, I see abortion as acceptable up until a certain point and evil after another point. You forgot to listen to me again. The gray area is that the overall event of abortion can be good or evil, either black or white, therefore it in itself is gray if you look at it in it's entirety.Cultures that think it is acceptable to invariably harm the existence of an innocent human being are either going to collapse because they're psychopathic, or they're going to collapse because they are overall brainwashed into not believing that the act of rape doesn't invariably harm a human being. Stop acting like there are tons of cultures that think murder and torture and rape are right, because there aren't. Cannibalism isn't common because only psychopaths and stone age cultures commonly practice it. The same goes for rape and murder. You think murder is acceptable in a place like China or Kuwait because they have different cultures then us? It isn't. Because culture does not bypass morality. The human mind does.Evil, in a way, is in the eye of the beholder. But harm is not. If you negatively effect the existence of a human being, you are harming it. Whether you think you are harming them or not does not change the fact that you harm them. The ability to attempt perceive this is programmed into our brains through morality. What you need to understand is that harm is infallible. It doesn't matter if Hitler's Nazis thought they were murdering evil Jewish people, because they were, in truth, harming the existence of the human race by deriving it of millions of people. Just because a group of Christians beat a person with turrets to death because they think he's possessed doesn't mean they didn't harm the existence of that human being, disabled or not. Harm is not subjective. It is a state of existence beyond the ability to perceive. It's radical to say something is totally wrong when many things are not totally wrong depending on the circumstance.Stop calling you names? No. You look foolish for obviously being close-minded and not even being able to understand anything I'm saying. My example is NOT sick, you are just a neophyte with no imagination! You think it's wrong, no matter the circumstance, for a perfectly sane and conscious adult to have sex with a perfectly sane, conscious, AND consenting teenager? I said teenager, not child, and there's a difference. Does your morality really only go so far as the law does? What's the difference between a consenting adult and 17 year old having sex and a consenting adult and an 18 year old having sex? The difference is that the law says one is abhorrently wrong... which is, in fact, bullshit. Having sex with someone extremely young is wrong because the child is not consenting and/or under agreement and/or understanding the circumstance in the first place. A teenager at a certain age has the capacity for all of the same things an adult has, including love, judgment, knowledge, awareness, coordination, everything. And if the teenager is a little young and doesn't have have all these things, they have almost all of these things. Who are you to dictate that love is wrong based on law or order? Consenting, mutual love is beautiful and chaotic and knows no boundaries. Which brings me to a question for you... if a 90 year old and 60 year old fall in love, is that wrong? There's a 30 year difference, as where a 14 year old and 18 year old have only a 4 year difference. It's illegal for that 18 and 14 year old to fall in love and exercise their love, so why shouldn't the love between a 90 and 60 year old be illegal to exercise physically? Do you not see the whole in that logic? A consenting, understanding person is a consenting, understanding person regardless of age. Children are never consenting and understanding people in regards with sex. Some underage teenagers, on the other hand, are, by mathematical probability. Mutual, understanding, consenting love shouldn't be restricted by the law, and if you have any compassion, you'll have an imagination and agree with me.Facts I know about abortion? Facts about abortion are that the fetus does not have brain waves, and therefore a consciousness, until a certain stage in the pregnancy. That's a fact. Duh. I've said that about a dozen times to you. It's funny how you've showed your obliviousness to everything I've been saying by asking for the facts I've been repeating to you over and over again.Yes, the fact is that a fetus, after a certain point, is a human being. It has a consciousness. Before that certain point, it has no consciousness. Now, I'm going to ask this next question with my caps lock and italics on: WHAT IS YOUR PROOF THAT A FETUS IS A HUMAN BEING BEFORE IT HAS A CONSCIOUSNESS? I agree that a fetus with a consciousness is a human being. You think that it's always a human being, period. Give me proof that it is a human being, period, regardless of having a consciousness or not.I'm not 'pro-abortion'. I have said this multiple times and my ideas are not 'pro-abortion'. Stop saying that I'm 'pro-abortion' before I decide to call you a dumb twat, you oblivious nincompoop. Yup, I'm God. Everything is God. You're God to, you know.No, it is a fact that under certain circumstances, sex with a teenager does not harm the teenager or adult, therefore it is not wrong. If it doesn't harm them, how is it wrong?Cheating can be wrong because it harms the emotions of your spouse or mate, depending on their mentality. Some people don't mind open relationships because they aren't emotionally damaged by cheating. Therefore, for them, cheating is not wrong.The same applies to lying and stealing. Example for lying: You're a Jew living in Germany. It's 1938. You look a little more German then Jewish. Nazis ask you if you and your family are Jewish. You lie and say you're not Jewish. You save your family and yourself. If you think that lie was wrong, you are a naive, brainwashed fool. Have an imagination that factors in circumstance.Example of stealing: you're poor and starving. So is your family. A rich man leaves his car unlocked. His wallet with 1000 dollars is in the unlocked car. You steal the money and leave the wallet. You stop your family and you from starving to death long enough to get a job. If you think stealing in that case was wrong, then you apparently are so brainwashed as to not believe in the morality of Robin Hood.Child abuse is never wrong, because it's abuse. Abuse is to harm someone for no reason. Harm is infallible. Child abuse is never right.I do not defend evil. I defend only good. You are just a humongous idiot. In fact, YOU defend evil if you think that the Jew in 1938 shouldn't have lied, if you think the stealing man shouldn't have feed his family, and if the 18 year old with a 14 year old lover should go to jail for the rest of your life. Do you support these things? I hope you say no.In the case that you say yes, you are an evil piece of shit. You believe in harming people just because the law tells you to harm people. In which case, you deserve the Hell of the black and white Christianity you so believe in.But, I don't even think YOU are brainwashed enough to say 'yes'. I'm glad you won't.You failed to understand what I said, AGAIN. Fool. People who are unconscious still have a consciousness. When you sleep, your brain is a billion times more active then when you're awake. The same goes for comas. They have a consciousness, and therefore we KNOW that they have a soul. A fetus, on the other hand, is not 'unconscious' at every stage of the pregnancy. To be unconscious, you must have a consciousness in the first place. Until a certain point, a fetus has no consciousness, therefore it is not 'unconscious'. It has no soul. UNLESS YOU CAN PROVE TO ME THAT IT HAS A SOUL WITHOUT HAVING A CONSCIOUSNESS. Of course your baby would do that, it was the size of a melon and had awareness despite being inside you still! It was human! But you know what? It wasn't human the second it's halves came together and fertilized. UNLESS YOU CAN PROVE THAT IT HAD A SOUL WITHOUT HAVING A CONSCIOUSNESS. No. YOU are sad. You are the saddest sad person to ever be sad. You're the coldest thing to ever exist. My mother died in a car accident at the age of 73. We kept her body alive on life support for a week and pulled the plug after coming to terms with the fact that she was dead when her brain died. You despicable c-... No, I'll stop from saying that insult. But you are despicable. Vegetable people are masses of meat without any consciousness. They are not comatose... they are not UNCONSCIOUS. They have NO CONSCIOUSNESS WHATSOEVER. I feel sad for you, being such a fool as to think that keeping a conscious-less piece of meat alive is right. To classify a conscious-less piece of meat as a human being is correct.How about we classify severed limbs as people to, then huh? Then people won't ever be allowed to amputate their arms if they have leprosy. Instead they'll have to die because of some illogical horseshit law that dictates that their arm may not be amputated because their arm is a human being. I'd say screw you, but you know what... I don't need to. Your life is bound to be ruined in the long run if you are so ignorantly brainwashed as you are. A soul can only be logically measured by the presence of consciousness.PROVE TO ME THAT A SOUL CAN EXIST IN HUMAN FLESH WITHOUT IT HAVING A CONSCIOUSNESS.Do it! Because if you can't, you CANNOT prove me wrong and never will!