Dear NNS,

I just noticed that you wrote. "Killing babies is a horrific thing to me."

It is a horrific thing to me also. However, a fetus is not a baby, and you knows darn well it isn't a baby. Just one of your tricks with language to bolster a bad case with dishonest rhetoric. It is reasonable to place the wishes of an adult woman over the welfare of a fetus.

Jesus said to 'love your enemy'. That's another bit of dishonest rhetoric. It is impossible to love all your friends. how can one love an enemy? Love is a tenuous emotion hard to come by. Jesus also cursed a fig tree because it wouldn't bear out of season. That was kind of stupid. Of course it might not have happened. The gospels were written well after Jesus' death. He might not have as stupid as the Gospels picture him.

I hope that you may emerge from the coils of your superstition.

Love is more then just an emotion. It is actions that you take. If you want an example of loving your neighbor look up the story of the Good Samaritan.

If you want fetus to be used, then use it yourself. Try it. Ask a pregnant woman "when is your fetus due?" Or try to comfort a woman who had a miscarriage by saying "don't cry, it was only a fetus." I'll stick by being respectful to the mother to be by acknowledging an unborn baby for what it actually is. An unborn baby is still a baby. It just hasn't been born yet.

Dear NNS,

I am not a corpse. I will become a corpse, but I haven't died yet. There is a distinction between a living person and a corpse. A fetus is not a baby. It will become a baby if it develops and is born. The distinction between a fetus and a baby is similar to the distinction between a living person and a corpse. The difference is that all living persons will become corpses, but not all fetuses will become babies.

I put the desire of a pregnant woman to terminate her pregnancy above the right of the fetus to become a baby. A pregnant woman may be eager to have a child so she will call her fetus a baby. Calling a fetus a baby does not make it a baby. One can call a dog's tail a leg, but a dog remains a four-legged animal regardless of what you call a tail. Like you I abhor infanticide, the killing of a baby. Abortion is not infanticide even if one calls it infanticide.

We both have invested a lot of time and energy in this discussion. I think it is a very good thing that a pregnant woman should have the legal right to terminate her pregnancy. You apparently do not think it is a good thing. I don't think further discussion will change the opinion of either of us. Let us agree that we both think we are right and will never agree in the case of abortion.

We may agree on other matters.

To David f.

If you don't want to talk about abortion and to agree to disagree, that's fine. Then don't bring it up. I only comented on it because you said I was against women's rights. I am not against women's rights, but am against abortion.

Agree to disagree on that, or don't. But if you voice your disagreement, there's a good chance I'll reply with a rebuttal. The act of agree to disagree rests in your actions. Abortion is not something I am going to stay silent on if it is brought up.

Dear NNS,

I don't see how you can be for woman's rights and deny her the right to have an abortion. When an outside person wants to control a woman's decision whether to have an abortion that person is against woman's rights no matter what excuse that person can give or what rationalism he or she makes.

https://www.debate.org/opinions/should-abortion-be-mainly-the-womans-choice

You are trying to have it two ways. Claiming to be for woman's rights and denying her the right to have an abortion.

David f.

"You are trying to have it two ways."

What a great way of putting it. But this applies to you more then me David. You say let's agree to disagree, only after you voice your disagreements and disgruntlements regarding my position on other matters then the topic being discussed. When I give a reply you back off to say "let's agree to disagree, we've talked about this too much."

Later on I assure you this would be repeated again because that is what you've done here. Drag down my position on any other discussion because you say I'm against women's rights.

So let's get it out in the open right now. Which way do you want it David? To hash it out all over again, and use the wild card "against women's rights" any time you want to discredit me? Or do you want to bury the hatchet and just agree to disagree. Try not to let the issue get between us and move on to other things.

Depending on your answer will be whether I reply to explain my position on abortion or letting it go because your and my views are not compatible. (As you've also said when you've tired of arguing).

You can't have it both ways, make your decision David. I do not play kindly to those who play games of hypocrisy, and my patience is lacking from these kinds of games you play at. (I am trying to be patient, take time before responding to distill some of the first reactions that come up. Make your decision, and I will acknowledge it by your actions to either agree to disagree regarding abortion, or your actions to voice your disagreements.