Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day

I understand and I agree with you. My contention was the lack of charity his position received. This isn't my view, I just reillustrated his view to exemplify how his position isn't entirely erroneous.

But that's not exactly being charitable to his implication. In his scenario the fetus is dependent upon the woman's body (thus giving her the right to rid of it), whereas in the afterbirth scenario the baby is dependent upon whomever.

And if you mean 'distinct' as in they are both 'persons' then this would just be a (contentious) presupposition.

Is this supposed to be a clever question? But if you insist an answer; I wrote an argument to refute the idea of questioning leading to favorability to ones (the questioner) side; and to bring awareness to what 'pointing out flaws' can do.

(Let me guess, this is going to have a following question right?)

Or, you can just 'point out' their flaws in various ways. Mostly, when you ask questions intending for their revelation, they often prevaricate. This does not get anywhere, seeing as how the prevarication leads elsewhere, (which probably includes more flaws.) But if they choose to be incorrigible, well, that's on them. Insofar as it is flawed, there need not be any worry. Just refrain from arguing..

So if someone clotheslined your hypothetical 5 year old daughter, then said: "sorry, the bitch looked at me wrong," and walked away, you would forgive him?

How so for my sake? .

You can not forgive someone, and still not worry about them. You can hate someone but forget their existence until something reminds you of them.

Genes that create low IQs caused by mutations during development. But it depends on what you mean by 'low'. Beneath average or around average?