At 5/8/22 04:02 PM, TurkeyOnAStick wrote:
: At 5/8/22 03:57 PM, GenericDungeonSlime wrote:
: : At 5/8/22 03:53 PM, TurkeyOnAStick wrote:
: : : These references are useless - you haven’t read them, nor can anyone read them.
: : :
: : : Was this intentional?
: :
: : Speak for yourself lol. My position has been settled on this long ago, this is a topic I went into years ago and I found all the information I needed.
: I’ve just realised all you’ve done is Googled “life begins at fertilization” and dumped the top link.
When you have the truth on your side, winning an argument is really that simple! There is this thing we study called embryology, and I can pop open any embryology textbook that allows me to view the inside on Amazon, and find this simple fact reinforced:
At 5/8/22 04:24 PM, FinaLee wrote:
: At 5/8/22 02:40 PM, GenericDungeonSlime wrote:
: :
: : No, it's pretty clearly a black and white scientific matter, as are all biological questions.
:
: lmao
:
: Anyways, lawmakers who subscribe to life beginning at the zygote will absolutely start pushing for regulation against certain contraceptives. And you can rest assured that their arguments will be just as paper-thin in substance as the post above.
I can't help but notice that "lmao, your substance is paper thin" isn't actually an argument and isn't backed by any reasoning or evidence here. For someone who typically likes to play hardball with facts and figures and statistics, I find this very odd!